It is one thing if I continued to edit-war, but I stopped reverting. From 1 November 2009 to June 2010, User:Number 57 made no edits at all to the talk page. Other users weighed in their two cents and it seemed (per User:Jonund: "Maybe it's time to leave this discussion and use the energy on something else. I think Shamir1 has settled it with conclusive arguments and rebuttal of counterarguments.") that we had reached consensus. Other users had reverted Number 57, and I did too just a few times when it appeared consensus was reached and per WP:V. Once it appeared that he reverted again with no explanation or support for his edits, I immediately reopened discussion and invited him to chime in and warned against edit-warring. On June 10, I went step-by-step again with Number 57 to explain our concerns with his argument. I also opted for editors' assistance per dispute resolution at this time. We avoided 3RR and waited five days for him to voice any argument. It seemed again that consensus was reached; only once after that did I revert and I stopped since then. :My edit was accepted by a majority of editors on the Kadima article. I did not "return periodically." I kept up discussion and withdrew from being dragged into an edit war once it appeared User:Number 57 would continue to immediately revert others without responding. I stopped all edits to the article and continued discussion in Talk:Kadima. Number 57 continued to revert without providing an explanation in discussion and I and other editors had asked him to explain his lone argument. He immediately reverted any and every user without discussing it first, as we did, in talk. :At this time, I did not retreat to edit warring, even though I was far from violating a 24-hour 3RR. Instead, I opted for dispute resolution. You may check my history since my last edit on Kadima. Despite support from other editors, I stopped all reverts and continued to engage cooperatively in discussion, discussing all possible edits. I then proceeded to ask for editor assistance, again, this time from a currently active editor, to resolve our dispute. I don't understand why I am being punished now after I intentionally held back from reverting. It is clear from my last revert--which was made the last time only when we assumed consensus--that my actions on Kadima since then was (1) discuss, and (2) search for ways to resolve our dispute without reverting. :At this time you may notice on Kadima that Number 57's edits have in fact already been reverted by another editor on grounds of WP policy. I am saddened that I, after deliberately withdrawing from an edit war and instead engaging in discussion and dispute resolution, am blocked, and another editor who had reverted without cooperating in talk nor inviting dispute resolution, continues an edit war. I am not blaming him for my actions; I take full responsibility. But I am trying to point out a discrepancy since the admin who blocked me did so after I raised the issue of, primarily, Number 57's smears against me (but also mentioned his edit-warring) on the administators' noticeboard. No editor reported me. :That said, I apologize for any wrongdoing on my part that did not prevent disruption. I am and have been happy to listen to outside advice and guidance and apologize if any of my actions constituted a threat to Wikipedia harmony. I understand my past experience on Wikipedia had included edit-warring, and I have learned my lesson. In this case I tried to show restraint by avoiding any immediate reverts and I truly believed I was editing responsibly and tried to avoid an edit war by keeping up talk, gaining consensus from others, and asking for dispute resolution. I ask that you kindly remove my block so that I may continue the dispute resolution that has begun. I will continue to refrain from reverting that article, and continue talking and cooperating with admins and third opinions. Thank you. --Shamir1 (talk) 06:46, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have just spent an inordinate amount of time reading a long, long litany of problematic behaviour and argumentative confrontation, including the material to which I was referred below but also the circumstances surrounding your extensive block history. What it all boils down to is (a) it is evident to me that you violated the clear and unambiguous term of your previous unblocking, and that this specific block is amply justified, and (b) your ability to contribute to this project has now been so completely overshadowed by your ability to frustrate the contribution of other users that there is no real point in allowing you to tip that balance any further in the non-useful direction. You note above that "I have learned my lesson"; I completely disagree. You were told in December of 2009 that your behaviour had to change. Instead, you are now gaming the system to get your own way in a dismayingly expert manner. I think it's time we cut you loose. Accounting4Taste:talk 14:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]