I had been banned from review 2 times on Stack Overflow before this event came up.
After my 2nd ban, I've been working carefully, doing 80+ reviews every day and passing ~30 audits (I think there's 30 but a rough estimation suggests 28-29). On Day 7, I got tripped by a controversial audit. Thanks to a ♦ on SO my ban was lifted that day.
One interesting side thing was, another user tried to protest his ban under the comments of my MSO post. The ♦ then pointed out that he was banned right after his last ban had expired. After that the user began to introspect himself. It's a déjà vu.
Leave the story alone and talk about the reality. Whoever has been banned from reviewing cannot fail one single audit, or he gets banned again for twice the last duration. This is unfair to passionate workers. One can choose to continue working during the 30-day trial, or stay away from reviewing and dream for née ponies for the month. These make no difference in terms of duration of the next ban. Proverbs say: No one is perfect. Proverbs also say: Talk much, err much. It's very likely you fail one or so audits if you're going through 200~300 audits in 6 to 8 weeks, especially given the fact that careless reviewers make the system generate bad, controversial or questionable audits, which I am disappointed with. The current mechanics will only refuse potential good reviewers' passion and determination and will not encourage the banned to continue with extra carefulness. It definitely needs an improvement.
Be more lenient to careful and passionate reviewers, by reducing their grace period after last ban according to the number of passed audits. I recommend to reduce the period by 1 day for every 2 passes. More audit passes is fine (say 3) but it shouldn't be too much or this improvement will be almost useless.
Or alternatively, allow an extra audit failure before banning for every 20 (or 25) passed audits (capped at 3). We are all human at last, so Review much, err much.