 Something these admins have clearly not read Its clear from the reckless disregard shown towards Chooserr that the admins of wikipedia are failing to read the materials provided for their education  In this case the WikipediaControversialblocks page  The copy below has emphasis provided where the admins in this situation are failingWikipediaControversial blocksFrom Wikipedia the free encyclopediaWhile blocking IP addresses responsible for anonymous clearcut vandalism is routine many other uses of IP and username blocks are contentious Where consensus proves elusive such blocks are damaging to the communityThe most controversial blocks are blocks of suspected sock puppets or reincarnations of banned users loggedin users with a substantial history of valid contributions regardless of the reasoning for the block blocks made under the disruption provision of the blocking policy blocks that while possibly wise lack policy basisOnce you are convinced that a block is warranted the recommended procedure for  controversial blocks is Check the facts with care Reread appropriate parts of WikipediaBlocking policy If possible contact other administrators informally to be sure there are others who agree with your reasoning The administrators noticeboard IRC and email are effective tools for this Place the block exercising due care in the wording of the reason  message and include a link to the user page of the user being blocked Place a notice of the block on the talk page of the affected user with additional rationale outlining the facts and the part of the blocking policy you feel applies Be willing to discuss the block with other Wikipedians Such discussion usually takes place either on the blocked users talk page or the administrators noticeboard the latter especially in those cases where it was already raised thereBlock wars in which a user is repeatedly blocked and unblocked are extremely harmful They are a source of frustration and disappointment to many seasoned Wikipedians and tend to encourage further bad behavior on the part of the blocked user Avoid them Instead discuss the matter and try to reach a consensusIf no consensus has emerged after several respected Wikipedians have reviewed the matter the user should be left unblocked

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
 Something these admins have clearly not read Its clear from the reckless disregard shown towards Chooserr that the admins of wikipedia are failing to read the materials provided for their education  In this case the WikipediaControversialblocks page  The copy below has emphasis provided where the admins in this situation are failingWikipediaControversial blocksFrom Wikipedia the free encyclopediaWhile blocking IP addresses responsible for anonymous clearcut vandalism is routine many other uses of IP and username blocks are contentious Where consensus proves elusive such blocks are damaging to the communityThe most controversial blocks are blocks of suspected sock puppets or reincarnations of banned users loggedin users with a substantial history of valid contributions regardless of the reasoning for the block blocks made under the disruption provision of the blocking policy blocks that while possibly wise lack policy basisOnce you are convinced that a block is warranted the recommended procedure for  controversial blocks is Check the facts with care Reread appropriate parts of WikipediaBlocking policy If possible contact other administrators informally to be sure there are others who agree with your reasoning The administrators noticeboard IRC and email are effective tools for this Place the block exercising due care in the wording of the reason  message and include a link to the user page of the user being blocked Place a notice of the block on the talk page of the affected user with additional rationale outlining the facts and the part of the blocking policy you feel applies Be willing to discuss the block with other Wikipedians Such discussion usually takes place either on the blocked users talk page or the administrators noticeboard the latter especially in those cases where it was already raised thereBlock wars in which a user is repeatedly blocked and unblocked are extremely harmful They are a source of frustration and disappointment to many seasoned Wikipedians and tend to encourage further bad behavior on the part of the blocked user Avoid them Instead discuss the matter and try to reach a consensusIf no consensus has emerged after several respected Wikipedians have reviewed the matter the user should be left unblocked

