This seems to be inherent to what Patreon is. Patreon is a thin layer to take money for subscriptions, generally in exchange for off-site content. Although peop

This seems to be inherent to what Patreon is. Patreon is a thin layer to take money for subscriptions, generally in exchange for off-site content. Although people do make blog posts on Patreon to announce content, the general gist of the platform is that the person's content is elsewhere online. I would personally characterize Patreon as something closer to Venmo (or Paypal or VISA or...) than to a traditional social media platform. So it would stand to reason that any kind of code of conduct rules are enforced based strictly based on off-platform content. Like, you don't need to agree with the rule or the enforcement, I'm not trying to sidestep the debate about when and why a platform might ban people for what they say, I just mean the "off-platform" element highlighted in the title isn't really all that relevant here. If they only banned for on-platform and not off-platform then you'd just see users who fall afoul of rules stop using the blog post function on Patreon and just keep doing their content elsewhere. I think the choice to not name the social made platform, the user, what they said, or provide any context in the title is likely disingenuous and not in keeping with the best title practices for HN posts. It's a bummer because I think the actual policy debates around off-site conduct are kind of an interesting grey area, just not one that applies here.