This is a typical example of scrub mentality.
a)Bad matchups do not warrant bans. Fighting games have had horrible matchups ever since Street Fighter 2.
b)It doesn't matter how complicated a strategy is for it to be good, or be better than another simple strategy. It's not the player's job to make the game look entertaining, it's the player's job to dissect the game and best increase his chances of winning.
I'm not picking on you in particular, its just you happened to have a representative post that pretty much resonates with everyone else in support of a ban and you made a convenient list.
The fact of the matter is, yoda does not destroy the game. People who pick yoda will not win a lot after all the parlor tricks are learned. The number of people playing yoda and actually succeeding with him will not be numerous enough to make the game degenerate into this stupid low mid fest that everyone in support of a ban is crying about. Sure he has different mechanics. So what? He's part of the game, and you can beat him with in game tools. That's all that matters.
My main problem is, where do you draw the line with banning a character just because he's "different"? Why not ban Sophie 236B? Nobody else has a move like it. Or stuff like Taki's A because its faster than everyone else's. Or Talim's 33A in SC2, since nobody had a move that tech jumped, crouched, side stepped and was fast and safe. I argue that these things are just as bannable as Yoda is. The reason why is the ability to hit a high or throw is not something that you deserve, its just something that's there to exploit. Throws in fighting games are strong, but people use them because it allows them to win, not because it is something that is mandatory to use if you are good. Especially in a case where you don't need throws to win at all...