[glorioushubris]

He comes off as fully professional and measured in that link. Describing that as character assassination makes you seem like someone nursing a grudge, not someone with a legitimate grievance. And at least he’s left his response up for people to judge for themselves, while you’ve deleted everything you put in that Reddit thread.

If lots of other people really agree with your impression of working with Clem, point us at these other, similar opinions you mention. So far this is just “the lurkers support me in email.”

[nobodyandproud]

Playing devil’s advocate here.

Here are the red flags: - Lack of context. Why is all of the evidence hidden/deleted/tucked away?

- Speak for “everyone”. Was it really consensus? Why not take direct ownership of a decision, instead of hiding behind a collective?

- Pulling in a snippet of private conversation as a evidence of being reasonable.

- Naming and shaming.

It may well be that the OP deserved the ban, but a single snippet of a measured response doesn’t address the questions that said action raises. Without more evidence, I say it suggests there’s more to this.

[phendrenad2]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, etc. In light of these posts, which clearly do not match what GP is claiming, I'm going to conclude that either side could be right, I just don't have enough information.