I'm gonna indulge in some paranoid ramblings for a bit. Members of moderation team had recently made a modestly unpopular decision involving certain modestly popular community project, had to backtrack on it due to modest backlash it caused, and immediately this rule change pops up. The cause is good, and it's fine if administration does not wants known harassers in their community, but one interesting part is "other users who facilitate such conduct going unaddressed". This recent controversy involves a certain community that declares free (or at least free-er) speech as its founding principle. This of course involves certain amount of fecal matter being thrown at each other and people outside, and while I haven't seen examples of them bringing said matter here (albeit some Doomworld members thankfully provided us with free samples for research), this still falls under "facilitation of such conduct". Now, you see, there is a little trick that governments and similar ruling bodies like to use where they shield underhanded or repressive policies from criticism by slapping a noble cause on top. Not gonna give any examples as we do not need to get political, but suffice to say pretty much every government is guilty of doing that at one point or another. Point is, this rule change is fine on its own, and as I said, it has a noble cause, but the context and timing makes it all sound extremely fishy, and with a bit of tin foil and a handy corkboard you can deduce who it may actually be targeted against, so this might be one of the reasons why many feel uneasy about it.