So what do we got here in the end? Here's my summary:
1. A justified ban due to a combination of
1.1. "We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be." - which is well in line in 99% of their bans.
1.2. Majority here, of those who read the debate, having the same interpretation as the mods on MU
2. A questionable
extent of the ban - arguably against their own established rules
3. A public humilation with out of context quotes combined with denying the ability to defend himself.
4. An inexcusable aftermath of the ban, with not even allowing for an appeal.
That's about it for me how I view this atm.
Having said that, I'll drop this topic for at least a while if not for forever. I'm feeling a dissonance and I'm quite certain I'm having a lack of objectivity in this now.