Dan Polansky's block
He's making assumptions based on your Wikipedia record, and then drawing unwarranted conclusions as if it were a criminal record. And he treats you like a criminal. That's just not on.
I still do not think he should be banned or blocked. If anything is done, there should just be a mutual interaction ban between him and me.
Sorry to but in. None of us are perfect. Almost every regular contributor here (including myself, and almost every other sysop) has faults, and they have all pissed me off on occasions. But, on the whole, Wiktionary is better off with them than without them. Sometimes people just get so damned annoying that something pushes a sysop over the edge and he issues an unwarranted block. I have done it myself. Perhaps you should try to be a little less annoying.
What is a sysop? I will stop being annoying. I've taken down all the things I remember that are jokes, which were pretty much the sample sentences.
If you don't know the meaning of a word you should consult a dictionary. May I recommend Wiktionary? (see sysop)
Those familiar with CodeCat's behavior at User_talk:80.114.178.7#Unblock_2 easily recognize the hypocrisy of the above post. There, CodeCat made ample use of evidence collected at Wikipedias against a user at Wiktionary.
You must have read some other talk page. All I saw was her referring strictly to his behavior on Wiktionary when discussing the block and the reasons for it. She only referred to his Wikipedia history as an aside to you after all of the business had been dealt with.
As far as I'm concerned, neither you nor PaulBustion88 have done anything recently to merit a block, though he seriously needs to work on thinking things through before editing, and you haven't exactly been a beacon of sweetness and light lately.