"
You are kind to offer, but don't worry about it; I am content to sit it out.  I'd had ""BEER!!  DRINK!!"" shouted in my face seven or eight times by what seemed to be a genuinely drunk, belligerent, and yes witless and oafish editor.  I can see that in a quick scan of the talk page, words like ""moron"" stand out as seeming violations.  This is one of my frustrations with the notion of civility on Wikipedia, that – like the core content policies – it too can be gamed.  You can show up, as the editor in question showed up, write demeaning things about several editors, further insult their intelligence with a genuinely bogus (not dubious, bogus) argument about sources (to wit, likening Haaretz, Israel's most influential newspaper, to the Cedar Rapids Gazette, arguing that it's of limited weight and significance in an article about Israel-Palestine because of the size of its print run), then deny having made that statement (shrieking ""Strawman! Strawman!""), then say that others lack ""the grace or honesty to admit"" that they're lying about it, then make the statement again, then deny the statement, accuse everyone of dishonesty while refusing to clarify the statement, then start playing a ""drinking game"" and shouting ""BEER"" oafishly and halitotically in people's faces until...

Until someone points out that you're behaving like a consummate jackass, at which point said editor gets blocked.

It's not your fault per se, but as long as civility guidelines are enforced merely by scanning for ""name-calling,"" with no attention to chronic patterns of harassment, disruption, witless bullying and low-level trolling (even on the part of established editors and admins), this is going to remain a problem."