A banned user is usually in a stigmatized position, thus unable to prove his own innocence(quora.com) and a misjudgement of a moderator/administrator, without inevitably evading his ban.
The rest of a community who has witnessed the ban from only one perspective (the unquestioned mod/admin perspective), and not from the potentially innocent user's perspective, will likely consider that user a policy violator, which might be true for some users, but false for other users that were stigmatized in the same way.
It's a catch-22:
- Either shut one's own mouth and have everyone falsely believe that one is actually guilty and/or harmful.
- Or evade a ban to prove one's innocence, but then fall into the ban evader's stigma.
This is a Whack-A-Mole situation.
When directly contacting administrators to review the ban through a ban appeal form, one's chances are slim anyway due to mod/admin biasses, and one is very likely to get neglected entirely because many administrators usually happen to “have no time to deal with this” .
It is also irrational and culturally hostile to put constructive ban evaders into the same stigma as destructive ban evaders.
- Constructive ban evaders should be embraced and have their original account reinstated, because of good faith and because their constructive behaviour proves that their prior ban is logically unnecessary and obsolete.
- Destructive users should obviously have their writing access revoked anyway, no matter whether they are evading a prior ban or not.
↓ expand content
A banned user is usually in a stigmatized position, thus [unable to prove his own innocence](https://www.quora.com/How-come-the-Wikipedia-administrator-BBB23-has-never-been-sanctioned-after-violating-WP-5P4-countless-times-for-years/answers/184895343) and a misjudgement of a moderator/administrator, without inevitably evading his ban.
The rest of a community who has witnessed the ban from only one perspective (the unquestioned mod/admin perspective), and not from the potentially innocent user's perspective, will likely consider that user a policy violator, which **might** be true for some users, but **false for other users** that were stigmatized in the same way.
## It's a catch-22:
- Either shut one's own mouth and have everyone falsely believe that one is actually guilty and/or harmful.
- Or evade a ban to prove one's innocence, but then fall into the ban evader's stigma.
This is a ***Whack-A-Mole*** situation.
When directly contacting administrators to review the ban through a ban appeal form, **one's chances are slim anyway** [due to mod/admin biasses](https://poal.co/s/ModAbuse/117841), and one is very likely to get neglected entirely because many administrators usually happen to *“have no time to deal with this”*.
It is also irrational and culturally hostile to put ***constructive*** ban evaders into the same stigma as ***destructive*** ban evaders.
- **Constructive** ban evaders should be **embraced** and have their original account reinstated, because of good faith and because their constructive behaviour proves that their prior ban is logically **unnecessary and obsolete.**
- **Destructive** users should obviously have their writing access revoked anyway, **no matter whether they are evading a prior ban or not.**
(post is archived)