On 5/27/05, El C el.ceeh@gmail.com wrote:
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
The third listed revert is not a direct revert. You could claim it is a complex revert but it doesn't meet my standards (which normaly involve past history of gameing the rule). If a block is disputed it is standard practice that the user remains unblocked.