Although the below obfuscates the context which is undoubtedly relevant to what has happened, the following comments appeared to be reason enough for the moderators to ban me from the ICM chat.
AngelTC: But in any case I do think allowing this veiled, on-the-edge-of-acceptable attitudes and people hijacking the conversation into something else is not productive at all, we gain nothing, we lose opportunities, and only perpetuates the unwelcoming vibe of the community...
Harry Gindi: I don't think this community is unwelcoming. Toleration of difference, including difference of opinion, is a crucial part of a community being welcoming.
AngelTC: Im glad youve had a good time Harry, but this is not exclusively about you.
Patriot: @AngelTC You say you don't want an unwelcoming vibe in this community, but that comment is quite unwelcoming.
quid: @Patriot that's a pointless provocation, and it's enough with that.
My main question is why my comment is considered sufficiently provocative that it warrants a ban.
However, this question is in part rhetorical, and with this post, I wish to express my disappointment at the un-inclusive sentiment that I've seen in the chat, and illustrated it to other users of this website. Not only have I been banned for what I fail to see can be offensive, Dylan Wilson's overtly racist remark on white people's 'fragility', and AngelTC's rather provocative comment aimed at Harry Gindi appear to have been left untouched by the moderators.
In view of the opinions I expressed before the fragment above, it is abundantly clear that we're seeing biased moderator behaviour, aimed at silencing certain views in favour of others.