gileri, you are being unnecessarily bellicose. You behave as if it is your intent to somehow provoke moderator action against you, only to then cry “told you so”. Most of what you loudly claim here are half-truths at best. Of the three entries initially hidden, two were more or less juvenile calls for a popcorn emoji (which you frame as “direct insults”), while your entry, the third, contained explicit language that would be beeped over on television, and you added a sentence to the effect “now let’s see how moderation deals with this”. You seem to think that this is some kind of game about trying to find out just which buttons one must push to provoke what reaction. What you’re doing here is exactly what my DWG colleague has called it: performative diary commenting. You’re not interested in finding solutions, you’re just interested in grandstanding for the benefit of an audience.

You claim to have been “banned temporarily” yet the very link you provide with that claim contains the words “For the avoidance of doubt, you’ll be able to edit again as soon as you have read this message.” - so what happened is, you logged in, saw the message, and were able to continue editing. This is standard operating procedure in DWG when we have reason to believe that other forms of messaging - in this case the “Comment from SomeoneElse on 26 June 2024 at 10:46” above - somehow fail to reach the recipient. This did not happen in response to your offensive message - which was merely hidden like the two popcorn messages - but in response to you ignoring a request to stop performative commenting here.

I can also second SomeoneElse’s message; if you are honestly interested in moving OSM forward, and not just putting on a show for your peers on social media, then take the matter to the forum and have a calm discussion there about whether or not calls for popcorn should be punishable by what under which circumstances. You might want to contribute to https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposal-to-add-the-emoji-as-a-reaction/107167 in which the matter has already been discussed for a while.

And please, no more martyr messages like “I fully expect to be blocked for this / this message to be hidden / a team of bullies being sent to my house …”. If you write a message that is offensive enough to believe that you might be blocked for it, just sleep over it and re-word it with a calm mind.

As far as I can see, the “personal attack” consisted in the reversal of a lot of uncalled-for, undiscussed, and wide-ranging changes of road classifications. It seems to me that this was a legitimate quality control measure and not an attack, much less a “personal” attack.

Please do not tarnish OSM’s reputation with false claims of “personal attacks”.

You have since engaged in re-creating edits made by the deleted account (“pawpositioningsystem”) that you mention here, even though you were asked in osm.org/user_blocks/7207 not to do so. These edits have been met with questions that you have so far not reacted to. Please urgently explain the rationale behind the highway classification and name changes in the respective changesets (e.g. osm.org/changeset/137665216) before you make any further contributions.