It really bothers my sense of ethics that the scenario you described can happen: someone posting insightful comments for a year and not realizing they are a "ghost". It's a waste of human potential - both for the writer and for those who don't get to read the comments - and the system here is explicitly designed to keep the writer in the dark about the situation.
How is this a good thing?
It's a good thing if only because the alternative would be a ban, and they would stop posting altogether. They may be a ghost but I see value in their posts - or I wouldn't have showdead on.
This makes me wonder how many users have showdead on?
I write to share ideas/experiences I have. If there are replies, there is a valuable feedback - either as a validation, or as a suggestion of other things I should reconsider. I try to "reward" the valuable inputs by pressing on upvote, even I forget sometimes (upvoting is diverting - I don't really like to spend time on that)
Someday I may be hellbanned. Maybe 90% won't see my posts then, but the 10% that do is what matters - people who see value in dissenting opinions, and may still offer interesting insightful replies
Perhaps there should be a method for those with "showdead" switched on to petition for a review of a hellbanned user?
I also make a habit of upvoting comments that have been unfairly downvoted, and downvoting silly one-liners that don't add anything but noise to the discussion.
As for my own comments being downvoted, it really makes no difference to me since people can still read the comment. If I ever get hellbanned, I'll just leave.