[human20190310]

Even worse, I've skimmed the discussions that precipitated the ban. I don't even understand why the ban was applied.

It's not as if the person couldn't take "no" for an answer; the administrators seem unable to give the person a definite "no" at all. Then they applied the "nuclear option" when they got exhausted, and made a public spectacle of the whole matter.

What a weird way to run a project.

[cjcole]

It is strange, and there must be some context that's left assumed and unstated. This ban document, even in conjunction with the linked examples, doesn't persuade me. If this is their best case I'm left scratching my head. (I understand that I'm not the target audience.)

[benologist]

This is an emerging cautionary tale for open source maintainers - don't take a multi-year source of feedback intent on improving your project and find three times their feedback was discussed and retroactively call that tiring and ban the person privately as publicly as possible.