We all know the policy, or should. Because Jimbo has said it many times.
The best way to resolve a conflict, is by talking it out. Sometimes,
other users can contribute to a resolution by mediating, but this
doesn't always work.
If a party to a conflict so desires, he may request that Jimbo consider
blocking the other user's login-name. Such a block could be temporary or
permanent.
I do not consider _suggesting_ that Jimbo order a username block to be a
"threat" (as one user put it) or an "abuse of sysop powers" as a
couple
of others put it. Saying, "stop reverting my changes, or I will
personally ban you" MIGHT be a threat or an abuse of authority, but that
isn't what Erik did. (He might have said he wanted to - as I did a week
or 2 ago in a similar context - but "wanting" and "threatening" and
"doing" are all different.)
Anyway, I'm hoping this will all blow over, so no one has to ring
Jimbo's cell phone in the middle of that wedding. This should be a
joyous time in his life. Let's make it so.
Uncle Ed