|decline=I see no indication that the blocking admin made any comment about your response to discussion. In reviewing your edits, I note that you were engaged in an edit war at United States Declaration of Independence, and that the block is justified. Your first revision in the sequence was to remove a passage that you descrived as a "...bullshit paragraph", here. Once reverted, you then took three edits to add a new paragraph, here, which was then reverted here. You re-added it here, and were again reverted here by North Shoreman, with an admonition to discuss the matter on the talk page. You did respond on the talk page, here, with what could be termed as a mild personal attack (questioning another user's professional competence). Two minutes later, you reverted the article for a third time here. Though you discussed the matter on the talk page, you do not appear to have been willing to do anythong other than note the ways in which other editors were wrong, as evidenced by the fact that you reverted only two minutes after posting on the talk page, which would not give any other editor time to refute or discuss your point. You noted your third revert by indicating that it was your third in the edit summary, which shows that you were fully cognizant of the 3RR policy, and were deliberately approaching its limit. WP:3RR reads, in part, "The motivation for the three-revert rule is to prevent edit warring. In this spirit the rule does not convey an entitlement to revert three times each day, nor does it endorse reverting as an editing technique. Rather, the rule is an "electric fence".[1] Editors may still be blocked even if they have made three or fewer reverts in a 24 hour period, if their behavior is clearly disruptive..." So, the block is valid, and I advise you to stop edit warring in the future, even if you're right on point, because you will be blocked for longer periods of time. Best,    ~