In what context could I have mentioned it? @gussis was correct: the last time I mentioned the bylaws topic, or the vote, was well before the vote even started. Nor did anyone else mention it to me again. I was done with it when the deadline for affirming intention to vote arrived. Never another word after.
If you’re unhappy that total silence didn’t mention that change #3 won by a landslide, happy to acknowledge it now that someone else resurrected the issue: yes, #3 won by a landslide. And I expected it would all along.
The rest here isn’t in reply to Al. This is just a convenient place to say it.
People mostly resent hearing about potential flaws in foundational matters (e.g., ask anyone working in security). My purpose in that topic was to try to get answers from the Board. I had no actual interest in debating with the voting members, and repeatedly told them “suit yourself”. But anyone advancing a minority view gets lots of replies in opposition, and I nearly always took the time to reply to each, out of consideration for their time and effort in replying to me. If I had it to do over again, ya, I’d reply to very little. The only replies that advanced my purposes were the rare ones from PSF representatives. “Mere” voters couldn’t answer my questions; only the Board could, although after much effort Thomas and Brett eventually divulged clues.
And, yes, I did think I was special enough to persistently push for answers. I was a founding member of the PSF, worked hard to create it, and was on its Board for its first 13 years. Nobody on the planet had more standing to question a Board power play. All animals are equal, but at times a tardigrade just can’t push as hard as an elephant 
. It was far more my perceived duty to push than it was in any way fun or personally gratifying.
I tried to have some fun with it anyway. I almost always do, but that backfired hugely. Lesson learned. Tedious earnestness is on the menu now.
And so is replying to little. In fact, I’m done with this entire Discourse topic with this post.
My gratitude to all who spoke up. But my ban is history now, so transition toward better processes for the next one. All sides are so rigidly dug in on this one that I don’t expect we’ll ever get more clarity or transparency about it. I believe I already did more than my share on those counts.
If I feel a need to pick over the bones of my ban, I’ll do it on my blog instead. Yes, some parts of my blog are blunt and accusatory, but nobody sees them unless they go out of their way to find them. It’s not Discourse, although the vast bulk of it remains civil. The blunt parts have to be blunt to get across how outrageously wrong some things here appear to me. Few people have ever seen me angry (because I rarely am!), and suppressing that would have been disingenuous.
If you want to keep at it here, on Discourse, please keep it factual and dispassionate, and especially so if you disagree with what was done. It doesn’t help anything to get your posts hidden here, or for your Discourse account to get suspended. Then you have no voice at all. While I intend to stay out of it here, I enjoy reading, and profit from, what all have to say (pro or con). So, for my sake, keep your voice intact here 
.