First, I did not change the name of an AFD. I changed the name of the article. Articles are open for editing during AFD, and people objected to the name. I improved the article by changing the name, which no one seemed to like. Obviously, one should then change the name of the AFD to correspond to the article. For you to call that disruptive demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of the process.  If I had changed it to something silly, that would be different, but I doubt there's an editor here who disputes that was an improvement.
Second, I did not attack Aaron in it, I described his actions. I factually said he did not do a, b, & c. I also described it as a preposterous attempt to circumvent standard procedure. It was. Honestly, I've been around for years, and I've never seen anything remotely like that nomination. Now, I don't think he's trying to make a point, I think he's dead serious and that's the scary thing. I also don't think the others are trying to make a point; I think they're abusing process. Morton is handing out freaking barnstars to the little coterie that votes with him. How is _that_ less offensive than me making links to contributions. The fact is that everyone here does look at contributions by certain people, and I'm just not so fake as to hide it. Will be now obviously.  They've got a little hit page that conservatives watchlist for which article to AFD next. Then, they swarm on it to make it look like a snowball. Anyway's I have no intention of conducting an RFC. As you surely must know, those are a complete waste of time. I do have an intention of participating with well-reasoned commentary on the same AFD's based on the same sources they use.
Third, I did not _evade_ the block in any substantive way. I simply left a message on your page. Did I go mess with Scribner? Did I go edit? No I did not. I simply asked you to explain your absurd comment that _I_ had disrupted AFD.  
And, btw, I'd like to thank Tbeatty for being non-ridiculous. Grown people running off to adminstrators to whine about a humourous, though barbed, response to a silly template is ridiculous. Perhaps they're not grown though, in which case I guess it's ok, and I should stop picking on the children. I don't dispute that I invited a block; I'm just frankly surprised that anyone cared enough to tattle. Derex