Here's the summary: I uploaded a package that soon got flagged for deletion. There were multiple reasons stated in the email which got soon accepted afterwards. I was able to find an email address of the TU and sent him a response to the claims and even tho they were not valid, namely that ARM only packages break the rules of the submission guidelines, and that the package is of low quality due to using curl to fetch pkgver and checksums, I tried to comply in ways that would eventually make the package better. I explained that the way AUR handles package updates is not optimal and that I prefer automated updates over pushing repetitive git commits.
After some time have passed I reuploaded a modified PKGBUILD that added x86 support, after which it was removed again with the reason "Dupe of [base] linux package". Even tho the pkgurl field has shown it's the Debian kernel, I've seen this wasn't communicated properly on my behalf so informed the TU that I'll make a note about the difference in the package comments section. I pushed a package update after some days and added the said note and this led to my account being suspended. From my point of view, I'm being attacked for my effort to resolve issues, but the expectation is to follow orders rather than obey rules, which is abusive and also shameful. I have not broken any of the rules despite being accused of doing so. Meanwhile, only a single person has shown willingness to help. After reading posts of people facing the same or a similar situation, I was thinking why the Arch community treats its userbase in such a condescending way and came up with the idea that perhaps it's because "Arch Linux" is more of a hobby project than it is a commercial distribution, so there is a sense of ownership and consequently shared decisions of what "I" want or not to be in it, and therefore no incentive to keep the users happy. Despite of that, there are better ways to achieve your goals without the need to be offensive to other people I think.
