[WikiEN-l] Controversial block

Fri May 27 15:57:39 UTC 2005

Blocking for 3RR is a technical enough procedure, regardless who
implements the block, so long as the 3RR has been breached.

Jack states that: "I do not feel that I had violated the 3rr," and of
course, he is more than free to substantiate that claim with pertinent
evidence, one which indicates that his 'feeling' corresponds to
objective reality as others percieve it (i.e. that there was no 3RR).

As for Jack and questionable emails, I'm sure User:FeloniousMonk has a
thing or three to say about that.

El_C

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Sam_Spade

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Controversial_blocks

>I feel I am a "logged-in user(s) with a substantial history of valid
>contributions, regardless of the reasoning for the block"

>I feel that Mel Etitis has a long history of conflict with myself, and
>should not be blocking me once, much less twice. Comments he made to
>me by email after the incident (a conversation which I feel should be
>fully disclosed) make this especially clear. I further feel that I
>could have been warned, and challenge anyone to suggest that i was
>aware that my edits were seen to be a 3rr violation, or that if I had
>been advised thusly that I would have continued to revert. As I made
>clear in my comment to David here, I do not feel that I had violated
>the 3rr, and I have no intent to resume the questioned behaviours. I
>request that I be unblocked.

>Jack (User:Sam Spade)