In hindsight, banning this user may have been a bad idea. He was asking for it, but I shouldn't have taken the bait.
For those who weren't following the block log at the time, I should point out that it was only this user's username that was blocked. His IP was unblocked, so he was free to create a new account with a more appropriate user name if he really wanted to contribute sensibly. However, the fact that the first thing he did after being blocked was to create the account " User:UnbannableTwo", I expect his intention is to upset people rather than to be part of Wikipedia.
Many people have expressed support for what I did, both on IRC and on the mailing list, but I know that policy wise the decision could be criticised. I agree with earlier comments that this should not be used to establish a precedent of sysops making blocks on user names. Hopefully in future that won't need to happen as the arbitration committee will be available to deal with users who are demonstrating troll-like behaviour and those who are trying to test the system, so the decision won't be left to individual judgement.
I apologise to those who feel I have overstepped my bounds on this one.
Angela.
________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" your friends today! Download Messenger Now http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html