Thread:Sannse/@comment-1251315-20160606142915/@comment-352650-20160606204657

I am the blocking admin involved in this case. Per the Harry Potter Wiki's blocking policy, "any administrator may block any user that they determine is a detriment to the project," and "final discretion is left to the blocking administrator on a case-by-case basis."

SuperSajuuk did some good work on our wiki, but unfortunately he had a habit of acting unilaterally, essentially formulating and enforcing his own policies even though they ran completely counter to established policy and practice. He's as much as admitted that he feels justified in ignoring policies/practices he dislikes. When called out for such behaviour, he dug his heels in, refusing to acknowledge that he had done anything out of line, much less change. He has displayed marked difficulty in letting matters rest and in taking no for an answer. When his request for bot rights didn't go through due to concerns he might use a bot to carry out unilateral actions, he started repeatedly badgering other admins, presumably in the hope that asking enough people enough times would change the outcome.

He was often combative and hostile in his approach to other users. He seems to equate disagreeing with his ideas to objecting to him personally. He persistently refused to acknowledge that his conduct was problematic and needed to change. This lead him to personalize disputes and characterize those who called him out (including me) as being motivated by some kind of irrational vendetta.

I'd go so far as to say his conduct crossed the line into harassment at times. He scared off at least one new user by threatening to have them blocked over a completely minor mistake (which in and of itself was overstepping his authority). I've also been privately contacted by a user who felt that his conduct was creating a toxic environment that made them want to stop editing.

SuperSajuuk has a similar history on other wikis. He's currently banned for a year on the Elder Scrolls Wiki and many of the concerns raised regarding his conduct by users of that wiki are identical to concerns raised about his behaviour on HP Wiki. I was actually aware of this history at the time he requested Content Moderator rights, but I decided he deserved a chance for a fresh start on our wiki. Unfortunately, he hasn't changed his ways, and has continued the pattern of behaviour that lead to him being banned for a year on TES Wiki.

I elected for an indefinite ban because of the intransigence SuperSujaak has shown. His problematic conduct has persisted across multiple wikis, and he has persistently refused to acknowledge that he has done wrong, much less endeavor to change. The fact that he's come here insisting he was randomly blocked for no reason, rather than as a direct consequence of his actions, underscores how deep the issue runs. I judged SuperSajuuk to ultimately be a detriment to our wiki and acted accordingly.

Our user base skews toward teenagers and young adults. There's a difficult balance to be struck between allowing misguided/inexperienced users a chance to reform and giving truly disruptive users such a long lease that they drive off productive users.

I blocked SuperSujaak from editing his talk page because of a pattern of escalation in his final posts, which contained increasingly abusive messages directed at me. Also because I foresaw what is happening here: that SuperSajuuk would protest what he deems the injustice of his block without acknowledging he did anything wrong. Thus allowing him to escalate and drag out the matter even further would be unproductive.

The block is final and not open for discussion, I'm afraid.