It seems to me that Danny should have marked his action as WP:OFFICE if he meant it to carry the weight of an office action. Not only did he leave off the WP:Office label, he also left a misleading Talk page summary: "This article has been stubbed and protected pending resolution of POV issues." That is very misleading and misleading the community is not a good way to build trust or goodwill. There should be no such thing as an office action that cannot be advertised as an office action. No one is asking Danny to explain WHY the office action has to be taken. Just tell us it IS an office action so we know not to revert it. Asking people to be mind readers is just wrong. It's perfectly fine to suggest that maybe Eloquence should have contacted Danny BEFORE reverting, not after. But if we are going to hold Eloquence to that standard, then we should hold Danny to it as well. That means that Danny should have contacted Eloquence before he banned him and de-sysopped him. Finally, I love the message for our attorney which explains the importance of having an office policy, but does absolutely nothing to provide any rational for why we should then FAIL TO FOLLW our office policy. I guess maybe that sort of speech fools some of the people some of the time. -Johntex