{{unblock} I have contributed very constructively via my criticism. You are not the arbitrator of how constructively I contribute or not, and from all my reading of the regulations there is no banning rule for not contributing constructively enough. What is more, this is in contradiction of the harassment reason for my ban, if you can't verify harassment then you should lift the ban because that's the original reason of my being banned. So which is it? Did I actually harass anyone? Or did I complain too much? And you are being very hypocritical in wanting me to accept good faith when the safe keeper (that other guy here) of the regulations here in wikipedia is blatantly not assuming good faith, and harassing me instead with this ban. It's the outmost hypocrisy to say here we ban you for no reason, we hit with a stick, but please assume good faith and even the mere fact that you dare ask for an unblock from us holier than thou arbitrators here is a breach of good faith. Because like a good little boy I should have said, oh, these wise person in his infinite wisdom and impartiality decides out of the blue to ban me, I should assume good faith from his part (because there's so much kindness and consideration emanating from them, right?) and you know say oh he is absolutely right I am going to wait this out....You should lift the ban immediately. }