Cluin your succinct synopsis of the CH v Kendall affair is admirable, but relates to only one thread. The CH insulting Kendall thing has gone on for a long time, and apparently has it's origins in an exchange over the merits and demerits of Stan Rogers as a person, not as a writer performer, but as a person.
CH was unable to accept Kendall's opinions on the matter, and instead of agreeing to disagree he took to insulting Kendall in a vicious and personal manner, including wishing rectal cancer on him. I think that this when said to a man who has already had medical problems with a minor cancerous growth is the lowest of the low.
He also insulted another Mudcatter who is disabled, and according to a reply I got when I PM'd him to point this out, he was aware of this fact.
While many people apparently admire his ability to call a spade a spade, many others, myself included find his abrasive and intentional lack of tact to be out of keeping with what one would expect in polite social intercourse.
So don't make the mistake of thinking that he was banned for making one post, it was the result of a chapter of rude and abusive posts.
He will probably do what several other banned posters have done and come back as an anonymous and obnoxious Guest. I think I even recognise the style of some of those posting in this thread.
Giok