pull down to refresh

I'd say yes. Incessant and unproductive noise from certain people can sap other people's ability to focus on work. But that's probably because I've read about the preface you've omitted here. I know some of the context. And I'm thus probably biased in my answer. In an ideal world, I'd likely have said "no, one should not silence people on a project that has no central authority". Then again, Bitcoin core is just one implementation of the project (albeit the only one seriously being used), nothing keeps dissidents from starting their own implementation and try to get it adopted by the majority of people. One can moderate within a certain implementation, in theory, its effect does not reach outside of this specific implementation. Any company can refuse service to someone else, that does not infringe on someone's freedom of speech. But due to the very specific nature of Bitcoin core, it's hard to really decide on yes or no.
Ofc the context is certainly important here. I've chosen not to include it so that others can explain, as you have done. By now, I feel I've weighed in on SN about my pov, so I don't want to dilute the discussion any more with whatever my bias may be.1
I'd encourage everyone to seek out reliable information critically before making snap judgements. That being said, there probably is at least some value in knowing how outsiders do make snap judgements about this question (if it is done appropriately - hence the poll).
But due to the very specific nature of Bitcoin core, it's hard to really decide on yes or no.
Do you think maybe the solution is a pay 2 post model?

Footnotes

reply
Pay 2 Post could be a good idea
reply