I can't be much of a judge, but my impression is that perhaps the ban wasn't so much for the existance of his opinion but rather the manner in which it was put across. I don't know what else he posted but even in that post alone I can see a swashbuckling undertone which I find a bit unsettling. Perhaps more so in sequence rather than 1 post in isolation, though I don't know what came before it.

Few places where we can draw "the line in the sand", but I tend to think that it's best to NOT resort to a 'combative' style of writing. It wouldn't create a foul mood for the others and more importantly the point comes across more clearly. Less likely to wind people up, less likely it would develop into something else.

It might just be an "age thing" though; I suppose I used to argue in a more combative tone which faded as I got older. Maybe I just realized that, in order to make the same point, I could do so in a very neutral tone and be extremely effective for it.