Quote Originally Posted by Kalielle View Post
Hmm... maybe, although sometimes a good host might want to keep the boot reason private for the sake of the booted player. For instance, what if someone has to go because his gear is not good enough (not so much an issue these days, but it used to be in the harder AO3), or because the host knows that the player can't play? In such cases I might have a conversation with the player first but it would always be private, of course. Then if the person doesn't leave I'd boot with either "sorry" or "..." as the reason.

Now imagine that the group would only see the boot reason. It would lead to conversations like: "Why did you boot?" "He's not a good player." "why not?" "[lengthy rant about the other player's faults]".

Some issues are best handled behind the scenes. That's why when a group is full I usually PM the person to leave, and the group can't even tell if someone had to be booted and didn't leave willingly. Not everybody needs to be exposed to the whole "why can't I stay" discussion, or get annoyed along with me if a person refuses to leave. On the rare occasions when I do announce to the group that I booted someone, it's because the person did something so bad that I think everyone should know they were booted. But in most cases I find it better form not to bother everyone with group selection issues.
You're trying to come up with special cases where the publicity might be undesirable and almost neglecting the common case for what it is needed for, a common fallacy. Arguing against speed limits because you on some occasion you might need to drive a pregnant woman to hospital is just nonsensical. And for each of your examples I have to say that I would still prefer the boot to be public. I'm sure a host may feel differently, but as a participant, I would like to see the result. A boot for poor gear and I'd like to know that. A boot because the party is full and bootee had refused to leave. I'd like to know that. More than "like" in both cases I actually feel I have the right to know that. The whole "I'd like to spare the party from not knowing the gory details" really doesn't fly.

There's nobody stopping the host from having private conversation prior to the boot. And you could still boot with a "reason not disclosed" and I'd reserve the right as a participant to either ask for it or jump ship myself.

It's not meant to make host's life easier, quite the contrary, it's stripping the hosts from the veil of secrecy that some hosts clearly abuse. It should be implemented for the rights of the other 4/5 of the group, including the bootee. And not because it would be helpful for already good behaving hosts, but so that we'd have more of them.