As many of you know, 6 months have passed and I did nothing to appeal my ban. So, I will pose the question on if I should or other suggestions to this community mostly to deal with the philosophy behind such.
Now, to set things straight - I would like to produce content, so any situation without that (i.e. something GBG would most likely argue) would be off topic.
Here is how I view the situation:
Almost from day one, I was bullied and harassed by many users that would use various aspects of Wikipedia to try and do me harm. They had powerful friends who would help them sock and have done everything to out me, send out email attacks, etc.
Once I was banned, many of those people vanished. They no longer had a purpose on Wikipedia as they only had any kind of "power" through attacking me, and when they tried to go after others they were quickly stopped. Their methods and means were exposed. It is not a coincidence that those like Moreschi and Folantin dramatically stopped editing, and when the massive plagiarism by various members of that group was pointed out, those like Antandrus and the rest stopped even bothering with content (the content was plagiarised as they were unable to legitimately put up any, but used it as an excuse to gain influence to better harm others).
Now, I was able to continue producing content without having to sock or do anything inappropriate on Wikipedia. I managed to create three pages:
* Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard
* Kubla Khan
* Ode: Intimations of Immortality
Through donating them instead of adding them myself, I lack even the pitiful amount of control I had on them before. However, I also lack the responsibility to really upkeep them or deal with them. Thus, I could put forth a lot of material, get the credit, then move on. I also don't have to worry about the almost constant harassment, bad blocks, etc, while writing, so I am able to sit down and write without some new guy spamming up my email or talk page with attacks.
If I was unbanned at Wiki, of course there would be some new "restriction". That would mean that it would be a pre-set "weakness" for those who would bully me in some masturbatory sadistic manner to exploit. I could have more control to put forth my material through GAN or FAC, but when you see pages like Ernest Hemingway being passed even though its writing is absolutely grammatically flawed and awful, such standards are not as good as they once were.
I would gain part of my "reputation", but half of my block log were false blocks or the rest (including Arbitrator Shell.kinney's indef for "legal threats" because I told her in email that her email harassment and cussing at me was highly inappropriate and that I was forwarding it to ArbCom and people at the WMF) and they would stay there, giving people more justification to harass me.
So really, what motivation is there for me to even bother? I haven't socked, but is there even motivation not to do any of that? The people in power either don't produce content or have heavily plagiarised, so what motivation is there for me to even respect and/or trust them to know how to handle an encyclopedia? And, when they put forth someone like LessHeard up for a privilege that would require a lot of trust, how can we honestly believe they really know what trust is or who the right people are?
I mean, come on, he is one of the nastiest, most abusive people who has abused his block ability to cause tons of drama and bring about lots of harm to people, and he use to create various pictures dealing with real life images in order to harass his enemies. And ArbCom believes -he- is trustworthy yet bans me because 1. I put up a guy for CU because an IP was tag teaming with him and from his same region, 2. I said a person at Britannica was not respected, 3. I argued on a Linguistics topic even though I was even editing a dissertation at the time on the very statement I was arguing about, and 4. believed that Moreschi and Folantin were tag teaming when they had over 200 shared AfDs where no other person at AfD had that many matches let alone had a 100% rate of agreement there? I'm ban worthy, but his three years of tyranny is worthy of giving him another privilege to cause even more harm to?
As I see it, the chips are in my favor. I am able to produce content. Those who spent two years harassing me are unable to continue to use Wikipedia to do that. I am no longer connected to the hierarchy that is proved to be corrupt, plagiaristic, and unable to determine legitimate people who deserve to be trusted.
So why should I even bother grovelling to be unbanned? I'd love to see someone try to put forth even just one reason. I don't think one exists!
Edit to add:
I do appreciate the support on my user talk page, with the dozen or so others who signed in other parts of that page and expressed elsewhere. But seriously, this is the ArbCom that thought they should give the corrupt Everyking ops simply to shut him up when he deserved to be banned instead.