> As you described above, they damanded a conversation about why he was making the request he did.
They didn't demand a conversation. They continued a conversation. If he doesn't want to engage in discussion with them he shouldn't have.
> They couldn't just acknowledge that he had a request and choose to respect it or not when it was clear he didn't want to talk about it.
They were trying to arrive at a compromise. This is usually regarded as part of good faith negotiations. Trying to describe this as "dragging him into a huge spectacle" is quite shocking to me. Do you genuinely believe that if a person says "please do not distribute my package" the only reply to that thread should be one that says "we will remove it" or "we will not remove it" and then the thread should be closed?
> Even after they closed the issue on their side, (other?) NixOS people went to endlessly harass him on the home assistant forums.
I don't think this is an accurate description of that thread, but indeed, I think opening that thread was an example of poor judgement. A threat to make a certain library proprietary during a heated discussion is something that might be reconsidered or it might be a bluff. It should be confined to the negotiation unless it comes to fruition.