"

 Orlady has followed my edits and repeatedly made probably dozens of accusations, that I am asserting personality defects in others.  That is false, I believe.  The accusation seems like many others Orlady has made, which are arguably personal attacks.  I don't know what she is referring to, about the personality defects.  It adds up to her ascribing a personality defect to me, that I am a person who ascribes defective personalities.  Should Orlady be blocked?

What has been under discussion at wt:CONN has been churning of articles, both of vandalism and of reversions by experienced editors (addressing vandalism and also enforcing unfair/unexplained standards for keeping some unsourced info but disallowing new editors' contributions of same).  I have at times referred to long patterns of edits, after disagreeing with many specific edits.  I do eventually perceive really obvious patterns, like that Orlady is following my edits and finding fault.  That is true;  Orlady does not deny it.  It is nonsensical to prohibit my mentioning that.  It is a statement about the edits, plural.  In the edit that SarekOfVulcan mentions, I term one specific edit ""silly"" (in challenging whether an NRHP-listed district is NRHP-listed) but I do not call Orlady that term.  Whatever Orlady is asserting I have done, she has done more of towards me.

I don't actually understand the standard SarekOfVulcan is applying with this block.  I don't understand a distinction that can be made about my edits, which would not apply more strongly for Orlady for example.  I have discussed Orlady's edits and she has discussed mine.  SarekOfVulcan seems to be applying some standard about ""discuss edits not editors"", which is overall probably good guidance for wikipedia.  But, when I become aware of an editor repeatedly, i.e. hundreds of times, engaging in a behavior, and i describe that behavior as a pattern of edits, I do not think that is prohibited.  It is not helpful to prohibit that.

Note, Orlady has refused mediation previously and has chosen not to answer repeated questions whether she would engage in mediation now.  Above she complains that I did not reply about a private email.  It is a worse offense not to reply to on-line request to engage in mediation.  I requested her to answer whether she would, three times, within this recent discussion and she has not answered. ncram "