Thanks...I don't feel I am in serious trouble or that actions I have taken are deserving of a desysopping. My evidence and that submitted by Muscial Linguist and others clearly shows that the pages I protected/unprotected or changed to semi-protection were not policy violations. I made a bad block six months ago that was brought to an Rfc in which I agreed with most who stated I shouldn't block anyone I could be seen as being in a conflict dispute with. I also made a dumb threat to block another user recently that was reviewed at AN/I...

In another example, I blocked another editor (Miltopia) who was stalking my edits as shown under the section of the same name in my evidence section. Musical Linguist and others also tried to explain this to arbcom. Other admins simply would not agree that I was correct in my stalking comments, and apparently neither does arbcom.

There really is never an excuse for not following policy to a tee, but then again, I have yet to see a perfect admin...some simply deal with less than I have had to deal with. Those unfamiliar with my case will no doubt have difficulty understanding all the events. However, arbcom has a thankless job, but a job that needs to be done correctly or not at all and when the letter of the law is applied so unevenly from one case to another, I question where the justice is. I guess more than 200 article starts, 4 that I helped get to featured level and more than 26,000 edits are my legacy.

On a final note, when a person is "right" more than 99% of the time in the real world, they get a promotion. On wikipedia, if someone sifts through your entire contributions history and finds that 1% and posts it on an arbcom hearing...you get desysopped.

--------------------------------- Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.