It's the obnoxious protester who turns out to be right every now and then. It's the guy pleading for an unpopular cause that manages to sway public opinion. In

It's the obnoxious protester who turns out to be right every now and then. It's the guy pleading for an unpopular cause that manages to sway public opinion. In short, we desperately need diversity of opinion and manners. It's the obnoxious users who destroy that diversity by driving out everyone else. Getting rid of them restores it. How many hours of people's lives do you get to rob them of, pretending to let them publicly comment, before it's a bad thing? How many hours of your and other people's live are you willing to let a disruptive, vitrolic user steal before it's worse than the alternative? There's no bright line between "I hellbanned this guy for being that .01% of folks who are impossible to deal with" and "I didn't like Joe, so let's just let him think he's contributing" You start down this road, there is no turning off. Slippery slope arguments are a pretty poor excuse for an ethical system in the face of moral grey areas and conflicting issues.