bad deeds don't necessarily cancel out good deeds
You're both right
You gotta take both into consideration
In this case, there are 2 possibilities
1. Zapk was just going through a "phase" and has a low chance of committing any other revoke-worthy acts; ban justified due to insufficient data to prove innocence after being previously guilty
2. Zapk hasn't changed and is a high risk individual; ban justified
Either way, ban justified IMHO.