Pfortuny on Pfortuny's mediation

Apologies for the delay and for the following text which is far too long and I think out of place, but the discussion has led us here. By no means I intend my opinion to be regarded as more important than any other's, but for obvious reasons some people are expecting it. Here it goes. The history of this text is in  15:09, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

After reviewing the history and talking to , I have got the following vision of the facts (which is the basis for my opinion expressed below):
Alex's editions on the 29 were done without discussion on the talk page. This was clearly a serious mistake which led to the first catastrophe, but I think we may assume good faith here, at least ingnorance, not malice, especially if one follows the summaries, diffs, etc... 
Alex's editions on the 9 and 10 November were done using the talk page but he made edits before discussing them and, given the complete history of the article, the edits were too bold to be accepted without previous discussion; this led to their being systematically reverted (which is common use in the WP for that behaviour) and in the end to the blocking of the page. This behaviour was clearly a mistake of Alex's, and I put it to his not having read the complete history. While I am not excusing him, I do believe that most of the problems were a result of confusion caused by his Asperger's Syndrome.
Nobody can agree "not to make unilateral edits" (Adam's expression) in whatever page for whatever reason, this is a bit too generic and has no deadline.
He is aware of the damages he may incur in (damages for himself) if he repeats the above behaviour.
Before Viajero's suggestion, Alex had told me he was going to "try to stay out of Mother Teresa's page for a while". He has privately told me he is not going to touch the criticism section al least for a fortnight.
It sounds nice to be a mediator, but on the other hand it is a responsibility I cannot (I mean cannot, not do not want to or do not like to) take up for the moment.
If Alex behaves like he did on the 9/10 November, I will also agree to any rational punishment. I want to stress that I was in disagreement with most of his edits.
I do not think that Alex will cause any further problems.

Before stating my opinion, I would like everybody to know that Viajero's suggestion on my mediation was done without either mine or Alex's prior consent. He later expressed his concern about this to me. I feel it is only fair to mention it here.

Hence, my opinion is:
Unblock the page. If Alex behaves in a non cooperative way, then the resources of Wikipedia to prevent this non cooperative behaviour will be used, as with any other user.

But I mean as with any other user. If he were going to appear in the problem page, he has to be told in his talk page in advance; if he were going to be banned, then he has to be told explicitly in his own page and by a sysop, or whatever the standard procedure is.  12:35, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I have read the above and agree with Pfortuny.   13:14, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Last sentence was inserted by Alex after reviewing the text in my subpage.  15:09, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

EOT  15:09, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)