This is specifically left up to the discretion of the blocking administrator, and you were specifically warned against wikilawyering on this issue, so I'm afraid you won't be getting much sympathy from me.
That still doesn't answer my question and doesn't address how unjust the issue is. A rule that allows an admin to ban for some undefined thing is inherently unjust. You might as well make a policy that says "you're not allowed to be a floobit" and then leave it up to the discretion of the admin to define what a floobit is.
Your entire argument here is just "you knew it was up to the admin, therefore you are wrong." That's just plain absurd and is incredibly ridiculous. "Well you knew it was illegal to speak out against the government under the 'bad things are illegal' law which doesn't define bad things, so it's your fault for going to jail."
SHouldn't a requirement of being an arbitrator be that they are able to defend their actions without resorting to "because we say so" logic?
---------------------------------------------- Nathan J. Yoder http://www.gummibears.nu/ http://www.gummibears.nu/files/njyoder_pgp.key ----------------------------------------------