User talk:Gerda Arendt/User talk before you block

An edit offends you, but is it important for Wikipedia?
How a blockable insult can be important for wikipedia beats me. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

How a blockable insult important for wikipedia can be left without talk beats me. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

How content contributors can have a free ride insulting other people after in a previous step you double-checked with wikigurus beats me. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

How can you block for a single "edit offends you" beats me. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

And so on. I understand your intention for decreasing trigger-happiness of blockers, but I would like to suggest you to apply Step 2 of this template to improve its usability. Cheers, Staszek Lem (talk) 01:16, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

P.S. Computer programmers may help you to create a fancier chart with more options. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Exceptions
I like this box, and I was going to re-use it elsewhere, but stopped because there are some occasions I don't talk before I block. These are always cases of blatant and obvious vandalism, often accompanied by racist or misogynistic personal attacks or insults. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  15:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Use to your liking, - of course vandalism is a different story. This was first about a young man being proud about being able to block Eric, and (until I asked) unable to apologize for a wrong view on the situation. Unfortunately, it came up again and again, - the last victim was just unblocked today, without an apology. Civility is not equal to staying away from a few bad words. - You can rephrase this according to the above (which I missed until today). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)