It's good to let your ego be punctured once in a while. Most of us, after several years and tens of thousands of edits, start to put a lot of our egos into our work here, more than we originally either intended or anticipated. While it's natural for this to happen, the unintended consequences include feelings of ownership over one's contributions and a quickness to react in poor faith, and even with arrogance. Someone reverted your edits with a sarcastic edit summary? Let it go. Someone called you a bad name somewhere? Don't retaliate. Let it go. While it hurts at first to let these things go, being able to do so is the true test of strength and maturity. You only gain in the long run. Retaliating not only brings you discredit, but it increases your anger, and corresponding risk of over-reaction, as the number of related provocations rises.
This user is fallible and encourages other admins to be bold in reverting their admin actions.
The following provides information about when I am going to recuse from Mediation Committee cases.
I've edited articles relating to the Sri Lankan Civil War quite a lot, and think I probably should recuse from cases which involve this subject.
Similarly, I've edited some articles relating to the Sino-Indian border, so I probably should recuse from cases related to this region.
Also, I've edited articles relating to Buddhism a fair bit, and again it may be necessary for me to recuse for a related case.
I've edited several articles relating to cults and new religious movements, so I'll recuse from cases related to these areas.
I've been heavily involved with arbitration enforcement in regard to the Israel-Palestine conflict, so it may well be appropriate for me to recuse.
My current thoughts are I probably wouldn't have to recuse in relation to either Ireland, Eastern Europe or Pseudoscience, because my involvement hasn't been that much. In relation to homeopathy however, I'd probably have to recuse.