Wasn’t it the case that in their last exchange with the maintainer (that email that caused all the stir) they were accused of submitting patches that did nothin

Wasn’t it the case that in their last exchange with the maintainer (that email that caused all the stir) they were accused of submitting patches that did nothing at all and wasting time in doing so? In this letter they claim these patches were real fixes. Having got their University banned and overturned the effort it took to write 190 previous patches from others which have now been reverted, it seems likely to me that they are under internal pressure. In all it makes me doubt the sincerity of any of this especially given the tone in the last email with the maintainer. A lot of sudden learning seems to have taken place between then and now.