Thread:The Cruentus/@comment-34832619-20200527051227/@comment-34832619-20200527172855

1. No it doesn't. I've cited where it does not.

2. No personal attacks were ever made against you or Leigh. Stating that I disagree with how you run the wiki is not a personal attack.

3. Once again, RAISING A CONCERN TO HIGHER STAFF ABOUT THE BEHAVIOR OF LOWER STAFF IS NOT AN ATTACK OR OFFENSIVE BEHAVIOR.

5. You are citing the paragraph relevant to ARTICLE TALK PAGES. You are once again ignoring the portion pertaining to UTP, which clearly states: "Also please ensure to respect the user's wishes — if he/she does not wish to have such content posted on their talk page, you must accept their decision." You have disrespected my wishes several times by reverting my edits.

6. Once again, you were never attacked. Neither was Leigh. A user raised a concern about how Leigh undoes edits without explanation, I agreed, I entreated you to do something about this overbearing behavior and you warned me for it. Users should be able to raise concerns without fear of retribution; this is a blantant abuse of power.

7. The warnings you made were done on false pretenses, therefore your blocks are similarly unwarranted. Also "The first block could be anything from hours or days up to weeks, depending on the severity of the situation which led to the block. If the user is still disruptive after this block expires, further blocks for longer periods can be issued, up to and including an indefinite block."

You handed me a 3 month block, later extended to 5 months, far in excess of the policy. Again, very-heavy handed.