I guess I ought to add on to some of my original sentiments.
The fact he will not give implementation details is suspect. He claims he cannot so the system cannot be abused. This implies that the system will have the capacity for abuse. Anyone with any understanding of what data machines require and how they use it can guess implementation details. You cannot do security through obscurity. Or I guess in this case, validity. This is why one must construct a solid system. If the system is solid, the details shouldn't be a concern if made public.
However, he could just be bluffing to get us to block users that offend us, having us believe they will be banned.
From how I interperet it, it means there'll be some sort of algorithm that will be so many blocks for specific acrions you did or say will eventual lead to a ban, after so many times, but the question remains if the ban will be perm or it'll be a temp.
Algorithms are notoriously bad at context. It sounds good, but it can be manipulated, too, if you know the troublesome contexts.