The correct response would be to organize the community to create a fork that is more focused on correctness and security than on performance.
Whether it would be appropriate in this I case I don't know but I disagree that it is never the correct response.
I highly doubt that it would do anything to prevent that continued behavior. I cannot imagine a situation in which there is not a better and more appropriate solution to mitigating poor behavior that telling people "don't participate in this field". At best you will alienate them in such a manner that alternative approaches are less feasible and at worst you convert bad behavior from being passively to actively malicious. I'd be curious if you have a concrete example for when you think this approach has been beneficial in any context.
Note, I consider revoking credentials (e.g. disbarring an attorney or revoking a medical/engineering license) to be something entirely different as there is an active endorsement that needs to be terminated. Relevancy in this case would be to removing a package from a package/dependency listing service/manager.
Can I express that to people who think a volunteer project owes them anything & couldn't be arsed to implement the project's functionality themselves in the first place? Somehow I don't think that would be a constructive use f time.