So, by “putting your foot down” and continuing to escalate the issue after learning about the judge’s ruling, you don’t feel as though you were insisting on an outcome? If, in a game situation, after learning your opponent was going to get a warning, you insisted that they got a game loss, you’d certainly be guilty of a USC-minor. How is this different? The situation was handled, and you continued to escalate it, which makes you also wrong, albeit in a different fashion. Also, you should definitely review the judge Code of Conduct regarding diplomacy. Airing grievances publicly and flaming a player isn’t exactly the most diplomatic approach, especially when you’re using your judge credentials to add credence to your claim. It’s certainly ethically questionable.