First of all, I'd like to point out that while I administer this site, I have no oversight over the Discord server. (I don't even have the address to go chat on it, so there's that)
This post has been reported, but it breaks none of the rules. The closest one it might come to breaking is:
But, since Triple A didn't call anyone out specifically, he didn't break this rule. I'd say all he did here was post an opinion that might be unpopular to many of the members of this site.
In my personal opinion, I find the term "aro-spec" a bit... misleading. Imagine a scale between someone who experiences zero romantic attraction, and someone hyper-romantic, just can't get enough. Aromanticism is one end of that scale. It's a single point along a continuous line. Grey-romantic, on the other hand, defines a broad range of experiences. It's hard to say where you would draw the line between grey-romantic and allo-romantic. It's not like we can assign a numerical score to our romantic attraction intensity and say anything below 73 is grey, and 0 is aro. 74 and up is allo. So, we have to use a more subjective judgement here. In my opinion, if someone feels that their peers are much different than them, and/or are struggling because of the difference in how they experience romantic attraction, then they are grey-romantic. I'd prefer to see the term "Grey-ro spec", but I won't lose any sleep over it.
From there, you can go into more specific buckets, like lithromantic, demiromantic, etc. Imagine this as just a smaller and smaller subset of individuals (the next smaller set something like homo-lithromantic, etc.)
Again, in my personal opinion, I think defining aromantic as "never or sometimes feels romantic attraction" is also misleading. The Latin/Greek (not sure) root a- means without or not. If we start to include "sometimes" folks into that term, then what term do we use for folks who are "without"? While Jot-Aro's "one of the most stereotypical no-romance-ever aromantics" makes it more clear, it's also a bit of a mouthful. Once upon a time, I called myself aromantic because I was denying that my handful of crushes made me grey-romantic. Notice that my label is now "Grey-romantic", even though I experience almost no romantic attraction. One label isn't somehow superior to another, and if we use clear definitions, then we can discard "no-romance-ever" from the aromantic label, and just start saying "aromantic". This is a site for aromantic and grey-romantic people, so nobody has to jump ship if they switch labels.
As for the flag, I can see Triple A's point, but immediately counter with "well the asexual flag does it too". In fact, the ace flag includes everyone who isn't actively opposed to asexuality since purple is for "allies" or "community". So in that analogy, the aromantic flag works similarly. If folks want to wave a demi-romantic flag to show that they are in that smaller bucket, that's fine, but they could also be waving the more general aromantic flag too. I'm honestly surprised that any consensus has been made over the aromantic flag. I thought that was still up in the air, so to speak.