I think if the discussion about Estel's case had to happen it should have happened when he was banned or when his ban lapsed with Reggie still in charge instead of opening old sores now

Estel, frankly I've no personal agenda against you; my posts in the first page too are facts not some stories or agendas. Since you want to use the mailing list messages to prove points I think many people around here including me would agree with vi_'s message:
What has passed Estel I think we should let it go and let's really stay on-topic and discuss how banning works and what improvements should be made.

Screaming at each other really will get us nowhere and if reforms are needed then well let's clearly discuss them here without previous agendas/grouses etc...

To the OP, you shouldn't have used Estel's case as a reference but now that we have reached this stage let's just put all that aside and discuss properly on what should be the norm. Since I'm suggesting it I'll throw the first suggestion:

- I really don't think MODs/Admins should disclose openly unless asked on why a member was banned at least till the member returns from his ban and can start a level-headed discussion. This would be the option if the below option is not feasible in the event of unlikely politically-motivated bans (something I haven't seen since I've joined if the debate didn't involve personal attacks)

- I wouldn't want for example if I'm banned to have my name being thrown around and saying what alleged wrongs I did. I would however prefer an avenue to discuss or complain if I felt I was banned unfairly. I think emailing Council is a good starting point to let your concerns be known.