*I think that the sticking point - the potential problem with granting this request - for many administrators is that while Trongphu is exactly right when he says blocks are preventative rather than for punishment, he's also exactly right when he says blocks are preventative rather than for punishment. Yes, I know, that's a tautology, but the point is that while Trongphu views this block as punishment, because he feels it's unnecessary, there's a very valid other viewpoint that the block is preventative, because it's preventing Trongphu getting back into "this risky environment." The block (like all indefinite blocks) is on his account because it was determined that he needed to be prevented from editing here until he addressed the behavior that led to his block, and it's a pretty big leap of faith to say "if you remove the thing preventing me from editing, I promise I won't edit anymore anyway." It could be a 100% honest promise that will be carried out, it could be a 100% honest promise that will nevertheless erode in the face of temptation, or it could be a less-than-honest promise; because the community has, in the past, been burned by other people who made similar promises and didn't keep them, it's tough to know which this one is and it's tough to be willing to take that leap of faith.The other issue is that if the block is lifted not because the behavior has been addressed but simply to restore Trongphu's face, that sets off a potential cascade of issues. Once he's unblocked on the technicality of "I won't edit anyway", is he an editor in good standing? Does that mean he can exercise a clean start and reincarnate under another username, as editors in good standing are permitted to do? What happens if he's unblocked on the promise that he won't edit, and then immediately returns to editing? Can it be a violation of unblock conditions to behave as if you're unblocked, when you are unblocked?None of these issues mean that an unblock absolutely, positively won't happen here, or even that one shouldn't necessarily happen here. But I think what's causing reluctance on the part of the community is that Trongphu appears to be approaching this as "I've put in enough time, now I have the right to get what I want" rather than "here is what I want, how can I convince the community that making that happen isn't a bad idea they will regret? Can we work out conditions?" When we're being asked to take only the word of someone who had previously shown a bit of a tendency to make poor, snap decisions when upset - and to feel those decisions are justified - it's difficult to be sure, based only on what he's telling us now, that that same person won't do the same thing next time he reads something on enwp that upsets him.