Quote Originally Posted by Zandor
The option has always been that ban's can and have been lifted from time to time here. Most people are banned for a month, week, day or even a year. He pissed me off and I may have over reacted banning him for life.

I'm big enough to listen to others and consider their opinion. That's why we have a community it's larger then a single person so I thought I would ask your opinion.
It's been pointed out that I'm new here, but I think of myself as part of the community and a peer of you all in culture and spirit, so I'm going to throw in my $0.02.

I think it could be a good thing to have the option to appeal and/or review bans after things have settled down. I think that google artist or no, businessman or not, this guy was on top of a lot of answers, and banning someone like him is in a lot of ways punishing everyone. Regardless of the sources of his info and his motivations for being here, we all recognize that he brought a lot of information to the discussions. In that much we've all benefitted from his participation here, and we all lost something when he was banned.

I'd propose that a policy, if needed, be something like:

A) A review of the ban should be the option of either the moderator or the ban-ee after some sort of cooling off period. If a review is deemed appropriate in private discussions between the moderator and the ban-ee then the moderator should summarize to the community and poll, like is happening with this thread.

or

B) An initial ban is always for X amount of time, to be automatically followed by some sort of a review and final decision.

That would give us a chance to decide if we really miss the ban-ee, and give the ban-ee a chance to make a case for returning -- or not.

You asked for an opinion -- there it is.