nothing to add to the already frazzled discussion. What was said was said, even Millard came in,
Mojo why is the convo frazzled?
Members just responded to what was presented to them.
Some are also registered on the other forum.
Maybe you are, too.
How did they make things edgy, here?
Just because they disagreed with something?
The owner waded in because there was talk of signatures and membership status (it was brought up and so I asked about it. Utter dread, every time I see that gentleman "quoted your post". I can't even bring myself to write his name, lol).
It was to do with the other site and then translated to here, since a "signature" was added and people took issue to that.
It turns out they were right and signatures are not allowed here, unlike in the other place.
That is something the owner confirmed.
Is there anything else you are objecting to, aside from Alighieri being quoted?
IMO, you're book has enlarged the target on your back exponentially. As a published "author," you are now on the next level, and you're already at the "top of your game." There is a lot of clout that comes with authoring a book—of likely heavy science & experimentation (basing that on all your articles & post history)—in an otherwise arcane area.
You will have to explain to me how self publishing a book would make him an "enlarged target".
How someone at the top of their game would not bring kudos along, wherever they may go. This is the case for OP, here.
Either they are all a bunch of dunces, over at the other forum, or I would think they would embrace someone that brings interest and knowledge.
Hell, even try to capitalise on that.
Idk.
It just seems unlikely that someone should be banned "in virtue" of that.
What other reasons are the actual cause, we will not know and, frankly, i don't really care.
But if you could please explain what you wrote (sorry I am slow), I would be grateful.