I've a mind to exerpt part of Deirdre's post but I'll just trust everyone else saw much of what I did too.
Just because the current users have, over the course of years, developed a culture of their own does this make it right, in whatever moral, ethical, subjective or objective system you use... to resist any changes to that culture from a metaphorical 'new generation' of users?
Now if the owner/operator of the site had set out long years ago with the intent of setting up that specific culture, then yes, I would agree that there was some right to defend it from 'culture drift'... people pay to run those things as I understand it. If they merely enjoy the culture that formed, I'd suggest they have somewhat less solid ground to stand on.
Right now? from descriptions from Deirdre, as much as others, I'd say the channel sounds pretty fucking dead. Most of the active users use it as nothing more than background noise? Conversations aren't really about anything but keeping in touch with the other old guard users? Let it fucking die, then. Or let new, fresh people revitalize it.
I'm not going to defend Psuedo. I don't know the rightness or the wrongness of his actions, and I don't care. I just think that defending 'to the death' if you will allow for hyperbole, an entrenched culture is stagnation and rot. I fear for the world these people would create IRL if they had the chance. Not that I care, I already fear for the world that is apparently coming IRL, or would if I didn't realize just how false our heavily polished images of the past really were.
Where the fuck are my windmills? I've got giants to slay!