If I hadn't been personally involved (I was the HoS/hostage taker), I would have backed BD's decision. In hindsight, I don't think it was entirely unreasonable.
What is frustrating, though, is going out of my way as a traitor to cause chaos and take a risk like holding someone hostage (especially in an AI round, which cuts my chances of escape), and then be caught because the AI went for the "through inaction" subclause despite the fact that to its knowledge I had not killed or seriously harmed anyone, after I had repeatedly stated that my intent was to leave free and alive without killing anyone, and after I had gone out of my way several times to not follow through on ultimatums (because BD was RPing a conflict breakdown and reboot rather than just being a dick and ignoring the laws).
Frankly, it's at least partially my fault for not putting on insulated gloves before checking the door. I had them, knew that it was a possibility, and knew that the AI had told the other crew to back away from the doors. But I decided to be trusting, and it bit me on the ass. Funny thing was, I pulled the Sith traitor box, so I could've gone balls-out murderboner, but I decided to do something less boring and self-indulgent. :/
It was justified, from BD's perspective. Sort of a dick move from mine, but not the sort of thing I would have ahelped over. It'd be rather hypocritical of me to get on him for using the "through inaction" clause when I've always been a big proponent of AIs using the flexibility in Law 1 to minimize harm, rather than blindly NO HARM NO HARM-ing based on the situation of the moment. I tried to manipulate the AI, wasn't cautious enough, and paid the price for it.
What I /do/ have an issue with was when you recalled the shuttle the first time, despite me being very clear that I would kill him if you did. With a lot of people, that would have been a dead hostage right there, and a clear violation of the laws.