I am speaking purely concerning the discrepancy between the moderation log and reality. The reason given is this:
jonringer was suspended for 6 weeks (until 2024-06-10) for repeatedly derailing sensitive discussions and willfully furthering the division in the community. For more information, see Why was Jon Ringer banned from GitHub? - #23
If you follow that thread, you will find a lengthy post attempting to justify the ban. However, the reality is that jonringer was banned almost immediately after volunteering to shepherd RFC 175. If there is a genuine reason for his ban, it is hard to argue that this wasn’t it, even though it was never explicitly mentioned. My co-author and I were also banned without any reason given, which further supports this view.
The long, vague explanations appear as merely damage control and misdirection. It seems straightforward that this was a reactionary ban and, therefore, inappropriate. The fact that we were all reinstated is a quiet acknowledgment of this fact, without having to explicitly acknowledge it for mere political reasons. So again, his commit bit should be restored without debate.
Moreover, trying to cover up the simple truth behind his ban is not a genuine debate but rather more destructive and counterproductive politicking. This behavior is more harmful to the project than anything Jon or I have done, by a large margin, yet continues largely unhindered it seems.
For these reasons, dismissing this issue while expressing concerns about Jon’s demeanor is either disingenuous or ill-informed. While many things are a matter of opinion, I believe that logic can assist us in triaging and resolving these problems. If you can show me where my train of logic is flawed, I would be more than happy to amend my viewpoint.