It's yet to be seen by you. But you are not the first person to have thought of characterizing this behavior in the last decade. Some other people have actually done so, including the person you're responding to! (who successfully discovered and fixed a number of vulnerabilities years ago)
Most "blockchains" are just garbage scams. Many are just whitelabled junk put out by scamcoin factories-- development sweatshops that bang out whatever features at least appear to fulfill some nonsense a non-engineer wrote in some marketing whitepaper, in exchange for some payment. Then they pay exchanges to list then, pay influencers to hype them, dump their premines on the suckers who bought in and then wash rinse repeat until they're either wealthy enough to quit or blow their bankroll on a pump that fails.
If any of those are secure from attack at all it's mostly by accident -- security is certainly not a goal for them, and a non-fatal attack would just be a bit of free marketing.
Even ones that are less intentionally scammy, spend much of their time essentially failed under their own weight due to a lack of any technical competence supporting them.
> i suspect that there could be something here
A fine starting point for research, not a reason to make a public announcement.
Not even knowing if connections are long lived or not really shows you haven't even bothered checking on the most basic stuff that you could easily find with a few minutes of reading.
however - and i mean this - you need to watch your mouth buddy. you've been unnecessarily rude. i have decided not to respond with force - so either stfu or press your luck
Careful, you might cut yourself on that edge. Buddy.
But is it preventing the node from communicating with the rest of the network?
That's a big doubt from me.