Debate:Are Conservapedia's block periods adequate?

Topic
Conservapedia often employs year-long or even infinite user blocks even for the smallest of violations. For example, one can get labeled a "troll" and get infinitely blocked just for making 5 discussion edits, all of them intelligently discussing the topics in question.

On the now-defunct Liberapedia forums, there was a following message:

Hello, I am a conservative American! What I am about to tell you, I hope, will not offend you in any possible way. I just got banned two times on Conservapedia; the first ban lasted for a very short time, like a few hours, and the second ban lasts this month...in the year 2015! It seems that Conservapedia's ban limit per mistake/violation is absurd and totally outrageous. What is your ban limit per mistake/violation if I might ask? Obi-Wan Kenobody 08:03, July 23, 2010 (UTC)

The question is: are such block periods adequate for a publicly-edited wiki?

Only for repeated vandalism or spam edits
There are no perfect administrators. Even if someone thinks the editor may be a troll or a vandal, it could have just as well been a misguided user or someone who poorly understands what a wiki is. Wikipedia even has a policy called "assume good faith", that is -- if an edit looks and quacks like a vandal edit, one shouldn't always think it is one. On the other hand, if the user continuously repeats the same actions, they may deserve a limited block -- around a month or so. Andrew Small (talk) 07:51, February 17, 2013 (UTC)