The TAB report on the UMN affair

I feel like even beyond any questions of ethics, kernel devs just don't need to tolerate this kind of behavior. I mean, we have a whole code of conduct which can be summed up as "Don't be an asshole."

The report mentions the case where a reviewer wasted their time trying to mentor the bad-faith contributor. In my opinion, the researchers should compensate the reviewers for their time spent.
The same goes for the last set of patches which were in good faith but so crappy that they were indistinguishable from bad faith acting. The reviewers are not beta-testers for these people's research projects. This isn't some newbie dev who needs a bit of mentoring. This is a whole research group that should have internal procedures and reviews before code leaves their department.

If the UMN acts in a way that wastes more dev time than it contributes, the kernel devs don't need to tolerate UMN devs in their community.