In comments to the previous answers, you've indicated that you think that calling attention to yourself and your posts on meta should get you up/downvotes in a similar ratio as you get them normally.
This would be valid if the users spending time on meta had the same statistical composition as the users spending time on the main site. But this isn't the case. On the main site, you have a lot of "newbie" sysadmins and people who are new to the site. On meta, there are a lot of people who are experienced sysadmins and who have been on the site a long time and have strong opinions on what they want the site to look like, what a good question should look like and what questions belong on the site.
A new sysadmin might upvote a question or an answer that they like, without considering whether the question actually belongs on this site. A long-time user might downvote the same question or answer, for entirely non-personal reasons, because of their longer experience of the site. We've all seen the occasional wrong answer which still has been upvoted, by people who did not know or understand that the answer was wrong. (This does not mean any specific answer of yours; it's an explanation of how different people may judge an answer or a question differently.)
So, when you call attention to yourself by engaging in long debates and talking about how you feel persecuted by long-established members of the site, the people who will look at your posts are the ones more likely to be severe on bad questions. On the main site, you will also get people who won't bother to downvote a bad question because they don't really care about the quality of the site.
Of course, the meta users will also be the ones likely to spend the time to upvote a really good question of answer. As I've done to some of yours, while downvoting others.