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.