Dan Polansky's block
To be fair to Dan Polansky, I have been disruptive on English wikipedia and have trolled there. I'm not doing that here, but I understand why he is concerned. I do not think blocking him is justified. I do not agree with him that I should be blocked, but I can see why he was concerned, and although he had an agenda with his posts, I think that he had legitimate concerns. I have taken down some of the funny sentences I inserted into to show him that I'm not going to be trolling anymore. But I just wanted to give my viewpoint that he should be unblocked, although I felt kind of harassed by his questions, he had legitimate reasons for asking them.
He's been doing this for a long time now, not just with you. You said "And that you are trying to get me to talk to use my words against me, like a police officer does.", he does that with other people as well, including me. But what grinds me even more is that he's openly calling for you to be blocked, on your own talk page which is meant to be for messages directed to you, but directed towards others instead (he refers to you in third person). That counts as harassment to me. It's completely unconstructive and doesn't help except to intimidate and demean you. I think if he really did want you blocked, he should have posted that message in a more appropriate place like the Beer Parlour.
So this doesn't have anything to do with whether he's right about your editing (he kind of is). It's about how he acts. I find his behaviour aggressive, discouraging and unconstructive.
So are you saying you agree with him that I should be blocked?
No, not at all. What I agree with is maybe that some of your edits, like those usage examples, are a bit over the top. But you recognise that too already, calling for a block is way too much. I'm not going to call you a troll either, hopefully I can be more constructive than that.
Well, I definitely trolled sometimes on English wikipedia, but I have not done that here at all. So I can see why Polansky would think I'm doing that here, even though I'm not.
He's making assumptions based on your Wikipedia record, and then drawing unwarranted conclusions as if it were a criminal record. And he treats you like a criminal. That's just not on.
I still do not think he should be banned or blocked. If anything is done, there should just be a mutual interaction ban between him and me.
Sorry to but in. None of us are perfect. Almost every regular contributor here (including myself, and almost every other sysop) has faults, and they have all pissed me off on occasions. But, on the whole, Wiktionary is better off with them than without them. Sometimes people just get so damned annoying that something pushes a sysop over the edge and he issues an unwarranted block. I have done it myself. Perhaps you should try to be a little less annoying.
What is a sysop? I will stop being annoying. I've taken down all the things I remember that are jokes, which were pretty much the sample sentences.
If you don't know the meaning of a word you should consult a dictionary. May I recommend Wiktionary? (see sysop)
Those familiar with CodeCat's behavior at User_talk:80.114.178.7#Unblock_2 easily recognize the hypocrisy of the above post. There, CodeCat made ample use of evidence collected at Wikipedias against a user at Wiktionary.
You must have read some other talk page. All I saw was her referring strictly to his behavior on Wiktionary when discussing the block and the reasons for it. She only referred to his Wikipedia history as an aside to you after all of the business had been dealt with.
As far as I'm concerned, neither you nor PaulBustion88 have done anything recently to merit a block, though he seriously needs to work on thinking things through before editing, and you haven't exactly been a beacon of sweetness and light lately.
I’ve been considering making a Beer Parlour thread requesting for D.P. to be permablocked. He’s persistently troublesome and you people just let him walk all over everybody. It’s extremely improbable that he’ll become a better person in the future, so a permanent ban is perfectly appropriate.
Look, even if he were an expert on every language in existence, we shouldn’t tolerate persistent misbehaviour. If he were banned, we might actually have more contributors. Stop being a bunch of pushovers and get rid of him already!