In particular, if the goal is to promote more discussion and openness between contributors, having a "committee" involved feels very counter productive. As does demanding an apology.
By all means, empower folks to call others out as rude. Publicly call out what you see as transgressions. But don't do so with a shield of, "I'm speaking for the committee."
I get that things can be harder in other context. But will never agree with personal messages on behalf of a committee, I don't think.
And for the apologies, that is silly. Would be akin to someone getting a citation being responsible to say sorry. Ideally, you want people to feel the need to do that on their own. At young ages, it is understandable to try and teach the formalities of apologies. But, as a formal policy, it robs apologies of any real meaning.
Kent is obviously well-intentioned and acting in good faith. He is also rather difficult to the point where I wouldn't be surprised to see bcachefs removed from the kernel at some point. It seems to me that mediation and help to deal with his attitude would be far more constructive and appropriate, not punishment.
I suppose that sums up why I don't care too much for the CoC stuff: it's too much focused on "punishment", and typically results in a committee deciding who is and isn't deserving of it.