You raise some fair points there. I think it's a case to case basis how they get to make users do all those steps mentioned. Not that people really want to be in depth when when backreading previous cases but some users just get small warnings for being new, some users don't depending on their account age or whether the account was already from the legacy chain, some in association with shady accounts that are on record. How they evaluate who gets a free pass objectively is something unclear.

For instance this case where a new user decided to copy snippets of content without proper attribution even after they were onboarded and told the do's and don'ts. HW only gave a warning and didn't downvote, and most likely if the user just went over to discord and explained it as a rookie's mistake, evident on the blockchain, they'd get a free pass. But then the user subsequently posted the same blunder and it took a few more days before they got their account downvoted by other independent users that disapproved of the act along with HW's downvotes.

The point I'm trying to make is that some cases have their own stories but the predominant narrative is how mean HW. When not so new users come into discord making an appeal, their history gets uncovered from HW database, and whatever previous history they have on the blockchain, they are discovered to make new accounts to circumvent their old blunder publicly instead of facing up to it, so their mistake would have a greater weight over someone that is completely new. But if a newcomer who has no firsthand experience on Hive sees that conversation, I can totally see what you mean when HW becomes the oppressor.

I'm not sure about how to approach the discussion whether it should be on chain or over discord when it comes to revisiting old offenses or new ones. I don't think people would want their offenses written permanently onchain if it's exposed by another party but then some are ok with it because transparency and decentralization, to each their own. What is clear is that there's usually a backstory for each person making the appeal and from a newcomer entering, it's not like other people's plight is their first concern but only whatever HW has done bad unto them.

From a public relations side, I do think the process needs more work for Hive. More consistency and transparency on who gets a free pass. People within the community also need to do their part in reminding other users that may not know the taboo like this instance instead of getting heavy handed downvotes from something as benign as a rookie mistake. I didn't bother reporting this case because it will suck for the newbie but there's no stopping people from reporting it to hivewatchers report for HW to respond to the case. They give some rewards for users that report these cases.

From a decentralized side, people can still ignore HW and go their own way if they don't mind the downvotes, because not being censored is more important than posting rewards.

Just my opinion on the subject. I don't represent HW and is not part of their organization~