What - I believe - you are suggesting by juxtaposing 'incomprehensibe' vs. 'comprehensible reason' is probably the fact that I was kicked for being poorly geared or having bad attitude or ninja pulling, etc. I might state otherwise, post screenshots, link my armory, whatever, but it's pointless: the actual truth is rather for a GM to investigate, while you're just playing the assumptions game (other than filling your reasoning with logical fallacies). Anyway, what matters the most is that you groundlessly assume that people get kicked for rightful reasons in the 99.9% of the circumstances. Well, the pretended accuracy of your argument is just a display of hyperboles and unproven assumptions.
So, in conclusion, thanks for your feedback on what you think I may have done: that's beyond the point.
It's interesting, instead, that you believe that people get kicked nearly always for rightful reasons. How so? For example, it was even discussed in the early days of the dungeon finder that people click 'yes' on the vote to kick without even reading the reason nor wondering if there is one, as long as it's not the tank nor the healer. And that was an issue beofre that the dungeon deserter was added as an effect of being kicked. Having a fourth stranger click 'yes' on the vote is, in fact, far from unlikely.
Finally, from your assumptions, you seem to derive the fairness of the rule.
The bottom line is: the deserter debuff as an effect of the kick was implemented - as I read and as I understand - in order to punish players that would sit at the entrance, refuse to leave and do nothing. So, the system is intended to deal with wrongful behaviour. On the other hand, the system itself can be easily exploited for other kind of wrongful behaviour (as I experienced today). So, I see the issue that they were trying to address, but my point is exactly that the rule was implemented poorly and it's an example of bad design.
Who said that I cannot?