This boils down to Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute   Diannaa is blocking because of a hot  oneonone personal conflict  there is no evidence of disruptive editing  any perceived abuse towards a user was onetime and barely discussed  ie  no repetition of any alleged behavior occurred  Diannaas block is in retailiation to a comment placed ON MY TALK PAGE my userspace   how can I disrupt my own talk page  commenting on her behavior  and warning that I might seek admin action against perceived abuse by her  Calling another editors behavior schoolmarmish and expressing that one believes that pursuing petty conflicts is highly negative and toxic  is certainly fair and within the bounds of the abuse policy  Responding to such a comment placed on own talk page with a block  is simply a personal  personalconflictmotivated attack  And with all respect even assuming previous warning was valid in its concern  block per the user abuse policy requires multiple repetition  This was and is a single incident  and only attempts at discussion however phrased have ensued  The block appears to be because Diannaa is in an active disagreement with me  and Im challenging her behavior  and what I see as abusive  inappropriate use of threats  The above is highly negative behavior  abuse of the blocks system  a personal attack on its face reflects negatively on WikiPedia and its environment  contradicts the blocks are a last resort to prevent true disruption  use discussion first policy  and seems to be an attempt to suppress discussion of dissenting ideas on various policies or just plain  Diannaas reaction to being disagreed with  In the end  threats  including threats of blocks  are not discussion  If one says well  the rules arent so clear  lets talk about this and gets back  youre violating the rules  Ill block you  then the system isnt working  If one replies to the previous  lets take it to talk  lets discuss and gets in return theres nothing to discuss  well  Ive read WPs policy documents  and you may disagree with me  but I think they could use some revision and clarification  Thats where this dispute began  and how we got here  One should not be blocked  for expressing a contrary opinion in discussion  on ones own talk page  and informing an editor or administrator that one finds their actions abusive  One should not be blocked  for expressing a contrary opinion in discussion  on ones own talk page  by the person one is debating  In the end  whats the rationale here  What ongoing disruption or pattern of abuse is this designed to prevent  That Ill post disagreement on my talk page  One is supposed to think before issuing a ban  not fly off the handle  This is personal retaliation theres no ongoing abuse or disruption  other than some stronglyworded opposition to the current phrasing of the abuse policy  itself quite far away from using disruption to make a point  unblock