It sounds like we had an effective if unstated rule: "When someone does a bunch of stuff wrong, get rid of them."

AA checked four boxes:

• Doesn't listen to feedback
• Doesn't make strong arguments
• Repeatedly posts on topics not of particular interest to LW
• Posts things that are likely to be offensive to many

We are missing some rules that might be useful to have, specifically 'what are the boxes' and 'how many do you need to check to get banned'. But quite frankly, looking at those four sins, I would think that any three should be enough to get someone banned. If anything, NancyLebovitz probably waited longer than necessary.

I would also say that making a rule based on only one of those factors would be counterproductive. I think most of us are forgiving (as far as bans go, albeit perhaps not in voting) when a user repeatedly fails on one of those, as long as they are also providing useful content in other posts.