I must say I'm suprised with certain statements in this thread.

If we want to pretend that blockchains are trustless decentralized ledgers shouldn't we be against censorship/prevention of usage from a large group with common properties of users? (ie users from Russia)
One key point of the word trustless should be that we can allow even bad actors inside the system. Enemies in a war could be perceived as, at most, bad actors (Russian citizens are not Putin). But the system is equal for both sides of war, and outcomes inside the system shouldn't be determined by the morality/just cause or any other philosophical factor. If it is, we end up with trustless decentralized ledger.

When I heard the news that Flexpool banned all russian IPs, I was appalled. If I had something like that happen to me, I would be very disappointed in crypto. This sure isn't a way to make it a global standard.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall anyone tried to stop nazis from mining gold, flagging their gold or any other counter measure in a system of value that is gold, during WWII. No one stopped them, after the war, from moving their fortunes to Argentina, Spain etc.

Disclaimer: I'm not from Russia, and I'm against the war.