Dear Colleagues  I thank the various administrators and editors for their patience and for their comments here on the various talk pages and by email Many comments have been made about procedural failures Each of my steps in the dispute resolution process is prefaced with a request for advice and direction about how to do this properly as I note here because I did not know how to request or manage an ANI conduct review or MEDCOM mediation properly A decision to block me was made which I will not contest based on comprehensive notes from two editors and accusations that I provide no evidence I did not know how or when to do so but I am learning quickly In regard to arguments made by the editors  and  above and upon which a decision was made to block me I respond as follows  I reviewed a long history of contentious discussion and edits in Historicity of Jesus  I then posted a bold sourced here which I encourage you to examine You may see that they are in some cases minor clarifications in others short simple neutrally toned presentations of divergent academic perspectives In each instance the sources provided apply only to the conceptual background of the claims made and do not pertain to the specific line by line claims of this article because the citations largely concern the framework of the discussion not its extensive particulars  I started a talk page discussion  Smeat reverted my edit without discussion here  Smeat responded to my talk page discussion but did not address the reasoning for the revision here  I continued discussion on the talk page and reverted back my edits here  Ianthomson reverted my edit with note of You must develop consensus here  I reverted with note Local consensus is opposed by WikipediaEditing policy Wait for external review here  I requested external review at WPRFC and continued discussion on the Talk page here  Ianthomson reverted the edit I requested review on again here  External review collapsed as editors ignored process and comments from external parties  I had been following what I knew of appropriate policy and felt I was being repeatedly reverted without discussion or attempts to communicate so  I then requested Dispute Resolution here please read dispute overview  Dispute resolution was opened great comments received from many editors and closed unresolved as explained here  On advice of DRN I applied to ANI for advice on resolution of conduct conflicts here and to MEDCOM for content mediation here  MEDCOM opened the request  editors to date have agreed to mediation  ANI administrator then blocked me without addressing my request for advice nor making inquiries with me and apparently based solely on the comments of two editors about which I have conduct concerns  My specific conduct concerns about some editors are outlined below  flagrant misrepresentation and exaggeration of proposed edits and propositions as here here here here here and here   claiming group consensus herehere here when there is no consensus at all as explicitly noted here and by the POV tag and evidenced by ongoing edit suggestions such as thesehere here here here here here here and here coming from many different editors during the course of this conflict  ignoring requests to communicate as here  insults and harassment as found here here and discussed here and extensively discussed here   Accusations of mental deficiency incompetence bigotry hypocrisy etc as here here here here here here and here  editing other users talk comments as noted here  multiple unsubstantiated accusations or insinuations of sock puppetry as here and IanThompson here and here and  others here and here  Note there may be overlapping references above Due to the nature of the discussion different types of egregious behaviour are mixed together within individual comments  These activities have been long term systematic and continuous They go back months into the Talk page archive I asked for advice on how to deal with this and have been blocked for not knowing how to deal with this As I have learned how this entire processes works I have attempted to conform to the various procedural requirements on the fly If I had known how and that I needed to provide this level of detail I would have already done so after learning how to Now I have My apologies for my ignorance and the lateness of this material  regards