I will take the time to answer your accusations point by point. I will expect you to do the same.

You have yet to quantify anything. Don't atheists respect science, reproducibility, and accuracy. Isn't the whole point of the scientific approach to eliminate ambiguity and insinuation and replace it with undeniable and quantifiable fact? Please provide links and numbers and refrain from using terms like "plenty" or "a lot" without clearly stating with links as your evidence the scale and measure.

"Pharisee questions" - who gets to decide what's a legitimate question and what's not?

First let's define the terms. If you had read the post you cited you would see that I clearly define what I classify to be Pharisee questions.

These are technical questions which often have obvious answers in scripture and Christian daily experience that are designed to implicitly present a negative subtext about Christianity. The idea is for the casual reddit reader to read the question, never click to the discussion to get the answer, and come away thinking Christianity is full of contradiction, fallacy, stupidity, or dangerous evil. These questions are then used in Atheistic discussion forums as background for the atheistic recruitment process. Which largely revolves around making Christians a "Dangerous and Deadly Outgroup" against which the budding "reddit atheist" can structure an emerging identity in the online discussions there.

Is it hard to identify these type of questions? No. Top comment karma getter in the thread and atheist account prium states.

This I have never understood. I have been an atheist all of my life, and answers to the type of questions you are talking about are pretty unfulfilling to a casual reader like myself, as they make reference to scripture(obviously) and it all seems very dry. Someone who asks these questions does not care about a rea response.

My response to this comment is

Someone who asks these questions does not care about a rea response.

They may. Jesus never stopped answering these types of questions, and he was constantly confronted with them, which is why I call them "Pharisee" questions. In fact the whole multi-century history of Christian apologetics, which has been with us since the 1st century AD, is a systematic attempt to respond to these very same issues. If more of the early works of Christiandom were online, which by the way Eastern Orthodox communities are much more versed with these, we could cite the far better answers, rather than having to rediscover the wheel for ourselves, not that modern Christians don't benefit from the rhetorical dojo workouts. Almost every single "Pharisee" question has already been asked and answered long ago.

What is unclear about this? Account prium obviously understands this.

I've noticed plenty of submissions

Provide links and give numbers. Do your homework.

There are a lot more Christian trolls here than atheist trolls, yet you completely

Again provide the links and give the numbers. Do your homework.

An awful lot of members here will gleefully call any disagreement "trolling".

Again who cites what and how many? Where are your links and numbers.

There are a total of 3 accounts banned from this subreddit and they were all doing the same thing- passively aggressively spamming the same comments, in the same style. At the minimum this behavior was a clear violation of reddiquette. The whole point of the post you cite is to announce the beginning of an atheist inclusive process to publicly and transparently establish a community policy to decide exactly what type of behavior is appropriate in this forum. One account's troll may be another account's truth. What is trolling as well as what is acceptable behavior is exactly what has yet to be established.

"I have never seen an online ethical code of behavior that more than a small fraction of reddit atheists would adhere to. Which doesn't speak well of this particular community"

What is the ethical code of behavior that the /r/atheist community expects from it's members? Are there any ethical boundaries for atheists when addressing non-atheists on reddit? What type of enforcement does the atheist community impose on users who abuse or harass other members? is there such an ethical code? Would you say that there is an ethical code that any significant group of members of /r/atheism adhere to? If so what is it, and how many do this, and who enforces the code of ethics on those who do not?

Your justification of censorship.

We are establishing the policy on abuse and harassment. Would you like to contribute some ideas on what are acceptable boundaries? Your input is welcome. You seem concerned about this? Why not stick around and help make sure the rules are as inclusive as possible? Maybe you have a great model of how you would like this to work? Please share I am all ears.

"actively (running) away from the responsibility"

There's no spin on that. The moderator accounts with whom I talked over that summer, literally stated they wanted nothing to do with it, if they responded at all and most of them quite soon after that resigned from moderating /r/atheism. Tuber, who I knew from well before the subreddit era, and for whom I have lots of respect, stated at the time he no longer believed in reddit and wanted to take the vast number of atheist account to a new community of his creation.

Two days ago, I sought out skeen the creator of /r/atheism before I banned the current accounts and made the announcement that headlines this submission. I sent him a long letter detailing exactly the nonsense these accounts were doing with links. He promptly replied that the account holder was clearly an ass, and that he did not put up with asses in /r/atheism. Our conversation is ongoing and he has welcomed future correspondence with regard to the development of our community governance.

Do you seriously believe

Given the way the some of the previous trolling in /r/Christianity has been referenced within the /r/athiesm, some of the activity in the past was neither innocent nor accidental. This is pretty widely understood, but you can dig through outsiders links to see what was impacted by what he cited. I speculate on motive using occam's razor, making the assumption that rather than being vile people only seeking self amusement that there is some logical structure behind the activity. Certainly outgroup identification of Christians is a large psychological motivator of some of the worst behavior witnessed on this subreddit. I am actually very interested in this topic, as I often wonder how atheism as a human philosophy self organizes absent a core text and core ritual.

with insulting a large heterogeneous group for the insincere actions of one or two people.

Thank you for acknowledging the reality of abusive behavior by atheistically oriented accounts. Determining the actual number will be easier once we have established our community behavior policies.

And then there's your boy Outsider

In that thread outsider documents several instances of soliciting votes and coordinating behavior within /r/atheism to effect outcomes in /r/Christianity. That in itself is a noteworthy contribution don't you think? The observation that the oscillations of an electrical field can create a magnetic field which in turn can create an electric field and so on and so forth, changes our understanding of how things work. One could say it illuminates things. Collusion within a larger group to negatively affect a smaller group is very relevant to the current situation.

As for the "evangelism hypothesis". It seems pretty well accepted.