>>In this case, we know none of those things. We don't know why Kevin was banned, it appears (although we don't know for certain) that Kevin does not know why he was banned. I agree with you that there are at least 3 sides to every story, but in this case, we know none of them.
>
>Kevin told me he had no clue why he was banned.

That is one side of the story. I can't say whether it's true or not because I don't known Kevin, and even if I did, we can't really make a judgment on whether he should have been banned without hearing all sides.

And that is my point. We can't hear directly from Kevin, and Michael refuses to comment on it. I think that is a poor decision on Michael's part. While technically he doesn't have to tell us, as the UT is his business, I think it's a bad business decision. It's obviously angering some of his customers, including myself, and making your customers mad is generally not a good idea.