...you average about half a post a day or less. Dorothy averages more than 10 TIMES that amount. So, no, not even remotely comparable.
Exactly my point. If you traced back to my earlier incarnation (user Sitting Coyote) and had the ability to see my average per-day post count when I started and average length, I'd bet it was very similar to Dorothy's. I was probably even more of a loudmouth than she was, and my posts probably more infantile. But of course I learned a lot, including a lot of humility, and things changed.
As far as apologies, Dorothy would have to have at least 5 or 6 months of on-topic, non-rambling, substantive, concise posting, before I would consider apologizing for the ban. It's not about whether she's a worthy person...it's about what she brings to the forum. This isn't a social club. It's much closer to being a classroom.
And how's she going to demonstrate that when you've chased her away?
Thought experiment: If I were a raw vegan who knew my health was failing because of a nutritional void in my diet and happened to find this board, and found a kindred spirit in Dorothy's (or someone similar) initial posts because we shared a common history of raw veganism, and then saw how she was attacked and booted from the board for merely talking about her acknowledged failure to make a raw vegan diet work for her, would I feel welcome?
Would I even feel inclined to take the idea of eating raw animal foods to fill the nutritional void in my diet seriously?
One of the stereotypes created for those who consume raw animal foods is that of extreme aggression. That stereotype fits your reaction to Dorothy's posts (and to other things) like a glove. Is that the image you want to convey in this public forum? Is that the image the forum more generally wants to convey when they give aggressive people moderator status?