Nothing has changed. The same core group of less than a dozen frustrated members keep suggesting this universal ban again and again. They then disclose their own inner insecurity by barging in and commenting on conversations between others. In other words, it's not about a ban; it's about being respected and being deferred to by those whom they cannot answer in the normal course of things.
My reaction is to ignore those who have nothing of relevance to say, but to remain open to those who want a reaction, a genuine reaction, not a stereotype of what they think should be the answer. I also don't think we should refute this in posts responding to these views, and in inviting the administrators to look at our POV. This just increases the noise level, and increases the stress on the administrators.
To gauge the worth of these calls, trace the posts of the proposers and their most loyal supporters. You will see why they want to make a mark other than through posting.