It seems that Rebbi Yehuda Ben Beseirah indeed does not play a personal role in the Gemara. The reason that Levi mentioned that it was Asra d'Rebbi Yehuda Ben Beseirah, was in order to mention that he was in the Asra of an important Rav who might have an opinion that agreed with the conduct of Yosef Rishba. In contrast, if he were in a place that was not following an important Gadol and was not following the Halachic norm, Levi would have put him in Shamta. However, the fact that it was Rebbi Yehuda Ben Beseirah as opposed to a different Tanna, does not seem significant to the Peshat of the Gemara.

Kol Tuv,

Yaakov Montrose

To add a dimension to Rabbi Montrose's answer, Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseirah lived in the far-flung town of Netzivin, located in Chutz la'Aretz far from the Torah centers of Eretz Yisrael (Sanhedrin 32b, see Kidushin 72a). Rebbi, who knew that Levi had been in Chutz la'Aretz, assumed that the townsfolk chose to be lenient with Basar b'Chalav on their own, since there generally were no outstanding Talmidei Chachamim in those areas to rely upon. That is why Levi pointed out that it wasn't just any town in Chutz la'Aretz, but it was Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseirah's town, and the townsfolk did have an outstanding Torah authority to rely upon.

One more point: Why would Rebbi want to put the town in Shamta? Don't we find that the town of Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili followed his ruling, despite the fact that it was against the majority? Would Rebbi have wanted to have Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili himself put in Shamta? In fact, from the story the Gemara relates later on this Daf about the town who followed the minority ruling of Rebbi Eliezer and was rewarded it seems that it can be good to follow a minority opinion (even though Rebbi Eliezer actually was put in Shamta, at the end of his life, for not accepting the opinion of the majority, in Bava Metzia 59a).

The answer would seem to be as follows. With regard to the city that followed the lenient ruling of Rebbi Eliezer, the Ritva writes that at the time of the story, Chazal had not yet deliberated and voted on the Halachah in question. Therefore, the city was allowed to rule like their mentor, Rebbi Eliezer, and by doing so they were fulfilling the Torah's edict of "Lo Sasur Min ha'Davar Asher Yagidu Lecha...".

We may suggest that Beis Din often did not vote on the Halachah while the Tana'im involved in the Machlokes were still alive, since there was still a chance for the minority to produce arguments that would convince the majority. This is what the Gemara means (Shabbos 134a) "Devarecha Yibatlu b'Chayecha ?"

At the time of Rebbi and Levi, two or three generations after Rebbi Yosi ha'Gelili, the Din was already finalized and one could no longer follow the opinion of Rebbi Yosi. This is what Rebbi meant.

Nevertheless, Levi did not put the town in Shamta, because the simple townsfolk just continued to rely on the ruling of their esteemed rabbi, Rebbi Yehuda Ben Beseirah, who lived several generations earlier, without realizing that the Halachah had changed in between.

Best wishes for a Kesivah va'Chasimah Tovah,

Mordecai Kornfeld

Sam

Yes, if the people were following a Halachic ruling that RYBB introduced during his life, it is appropriate to still call it "the place of RYBB", even after his death.

M. Kornfeld