I had the same reaction as azurelunatic. The question is, does the bannee always know that they have been banned? I don't know DW's answer to this, and it matters.
Some conversation designs intentionally hide ban status, or allow the community owner to hide it. That's for good reason: when you've got a troll, or somebody who is getting stalkerish, the safest approach can be to let them *think* they're successfully posting, but quietly hide it from everybody else. It prevents the trolling from being effective, while not signaling to them to escalate. (By creating new sock-puppet accounts, or nastier forms of stalking.) Hence, if this were the case in DW, "information leakage" is something you have to be careful about.
OTOH, if the more-verbose posting screens already tell you that you are banned (which it sounds like they do), then I agree with this proposal -- no reason not to state it upfront. Discovering that they've been banned only after trying to post is only likely to infuriate the troll, and make them *more* likely to escalate...
no subject
Some conversation designs intentionally hide ban status, or allow the community owner to hide it. That's for good reason: when you've got a troll, or somebody who is getting stalkerish, the safest approach can be to let them *think* they're successfully posting, but quietly hide it from everybody else. It prevents the trolling from being effective, while not signaling to them to escalate. (By creating new sock-puppet accounts, or nastier forms of stalking.) Hence, if this were the case in DW, "information leakage" is something you have to be careful about.
OTOH, if the more-verbose posting screens already tell you that you are banned (which it sounds like they do), then I agree with this proposal -- no reason not to state it upfront. Discovering that they've been banned only after trying to post is only likely to infuriate the troll, and make them *more* likely to escalate...