Bruce, please read my original post in this thread. The information that the two lists keep is disparate. Past sometimes fails to show the Notes.
The prior criticism seems to rest on (1) using a feature for a purpose "other than what was intended" - which is, as I'm sure you know, done all the time and no violation of anything, (2) "nosying around" after a member has left the group, aka, gathering information on why they might possibly have left - which is of course also an invalid criticism. The past members list exists for that precise reason. It is an implementation artifact that the two lists - banned and past - contain differing information. Banning someone, usually temporarily, to get at the extra information does not harm anyone.
This hack rests on the assumption that members are not notified when they are banned, which used to be the case. There was protracted discussion here not long ago about precisely that, and the reason that there should not be an obligatory "banned member" notification. Now it seems the banner is back. I am simply asking that this go back to the way it was, and the way the majority here wanted, which was not to notify people when they are banned.
Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.