JAY JG wrote:
Wikipedia is obviously a terribly flawed system filled with software that causes terrible hardships to validly blocked users, and admins abusing their power and just itching to "dominate" other editors.
Bishonen was doing absolutely the opposite of "dominating" other editors. Sticking her tongue out at Nathan and keeping the block would have been an example of "dominating"; instead, she lifted the ban after its intended expiry time.
A temporary block is only valid for its allocated timeframe. A 24-hour block is no longer valid after 24 hours.
You seem to have an attitude that sees Nathan as the wrong-doer, and you seem to think that Nathan is complaining about being blocked. But he never did. I think he understands the reasons for his block, and he is genuinely trying to change his ways to prevent the same from happening again. This is laudable behaviour, especially for someone who was indeed validly blocked. When the 24 hours are up, these people *must* be given a fair chance to show that they are changing their ways and that they will edit in even better faith than before.
What you are saying essentially amounts to saying that once you have been validly blocked, you are considered a "bad user" and do not have any grounds to complain if your block is unfairly extended beyond the original 24 hours.
Timwi