These conditions are problematic, as evidenced by the current ANI discussion. Because the penalty for violation is so steep, the community, generally speaking, is going to be reluctant to apply them to anything less than clear and unequivocal violation. We need a remedy short of indef for gray area violations. I suggest the following modifications, as starting point for discussion, if nothing else.

* In the event Fry1989 appears to beginning to encroach upon the spirit of the civility ban, any uninvolved administrator may topic ban him for three days from the specific article and article talk page which is becoming problematic. Notification of such a ban will be made on Fry1989's talk page, not the article talk page.

The existing
All communications must refrain from commenting on individual editors except on appropriate behavioral noticeboard pages, understanding that WP:CIVIL applies on those pages also.

is bad because it contradicts the board's policies, which require discussing with the editor off board first. This places Fry in the untenable situation of having to take it until/unless the behavior of other editor's is so problematic there's no chance of an AN / ANI boomerang. It should be changed to something like:

**All communications must refrain from commenting on individual editors except on the users' talk page, uninvolved administrator's talk pages, and appropriate behavioral noticeboard pages, understanding that WP:CIVIL applies on those pages also. 

It's uncool to be bringing up an individual editor's stuff on article talk. We should also add something like:

Editor's concerned Fry1989 may be in danger of violating the unblock conditions should raise the issue on his talk page, not article talk pages. NE Ent