I don’t think it’s fair to take his posts, that at the time he made them were not considered to break the rules, and retroactively use them as a justification to ban him over something completely unrelated.
You don’t think “Don’t attack other members personally. When debating, argue the point, not the person. Respectful criticisms of debate style (logical fallacies) are acceptable” and “Do not harass other members, either publicly or via PM. Any unwanted contact after a request to stay away will be considered harassment” have been rules?
The problem is that Frink was only banned immediately (more or less) after the r-word incident, and neither Jay not his mods clarified it was about the rest of his behavior on that day. In my view, moderators here typically notify users publicly when they’re on thin ice, and that never happened before Frink was banned with his earlier behavior that day.
Also, you neglect to mention the fact that someone else broke a rule, which according to Jay’s rules, is punishable by an permanent and immediate ban with no prior warning.