It goes both ways-- do we think a contract with a fixed guaranteed term can be canceled with refund simply because the consumer decided to violate the terms of service?

This is what courts are for, and the fact they aren't involved here is the basic problem.

When TOSs can have any looney language in them and are by definition adhesion contracts, I don't see them as particularly sacrosant.

They should be forced to show exactly why a user is banned. This bullshit about "we don't want to let bad actors game the system" is getting old.