@Bj9999 I'm glad you've joined us on this forum and engaged in this lively debate. You make many great points.
I'm not banned anywhere (yet), but I'm concerned because back around 2016 or 2017 I wanted a particular peacoat exclusively sold by Nordstroms and had to order 4 to keep 1. The first order was one each of XS and S sizing -- decided that the XS fit better, at $700 per, Made in USA. But the shoulders were stitched crooked and therefore hung crooked from the coathanger (and obviously on my body), so I returned both and ordered another XS. Again, there was crooked stitching but this time at the front. Not quite luxury-brand expensive, but not fast fashion either, and the inconsistency was surprising. Finally the 4th one was acceptable. I was persistent because it was a staple item I truly needed in my wardrobe...the only reason I returned so many was that the others were defective, the type of defects I wouldn't see on e.g. a $100 Gap denim jacket! But this sort of history of buying/returning probably looks problematic from a numbers-crunching spreadsheet analysis.
If I had been banned on this basis, I would have been pissed offff. It was never my intention to inconvenience or waste
Nordstrom or anyone's resources...but their quality control was so bad on an otherwise LOVELY item.
Like you, I am abhorrent of unethical or inconsiderate customer habits that don't serve a win-win relationship between customers and retailers. Such as those who are engaging in fraud, shoplifting, wearing single-occasion expensive clothing with tags left on to return and refund, etc. Because it means that generous policies are being abused and will eventually be reduced for *all*. It also means honest customers may end up paying elevated prices in the future, or simply don't end up being able to buy what they wanted to keep because a hoarder/impulse buyer bought up the stock while intending to return later...instead of the good customers getting what they wanted, and the retailer making their fair profits.
Now, the reflex policies by the retailers might be catching innocents too.
In another sphere of interest, I'm into financial products such as bank accounts, credit cards, etc. Some acquaintances in one of my chat groups got banned by American Express for abusive, repeat welcome bonuses they gamed to acquire...others for manufacturing ways to create cashback/points rewards. These account reviews and shutdowns have really ramped up since Fall 2019 and in my opinion are completely deserved. However, I am seeing some anecdotes of completely innocent, newer customers getting banned soon after an account was opened, which is not only a shame but will make me even more careful going forward.
Finally, what you say about the decreased selection of retailers and increasing % of merchandise being online-only is indeed a problem. I'm Canadian by birth but have some connections to the US and therefore do (did) a lot of shopping cross-border, to different addresses. One Canadian manufacturer of winter boots makers, I noticed, sold only a limited selection on their Canadian website. The vast majority of their items at all different sizes were sold at
Nordstrom (US website), or Zappos. That's annoying, because I had to pay more than the original Canadian price due to currency conversions. But also, if someone were banned from Nordstrom or
Amazon (for Zappos), it means that the points of access for even local products is shrinking and converging onto only a few retailers.
*Also wanted to make it clear that I'm not calling anyone here unethical just because they purchased items wanting to try on and see if they fit/looked good, and intending to keep what they thought would look good...but ended up returning a high %. That is simply the nature of online clothes shopping, which is unfortunate. I really try to minimize online shopping for clothes.