QUOTE(Sxeptomaniac @ Tue 16th September 2008, 5:59pm)
That's pretty close to my own assessment of the latest event. Really, calling KillerChihuahua by what was apparently her first name on the site was not only colossally stupid, it was an asshole move. It seems to me it was motivated not by what Moulton thought was right, but by what he thought he could get away with. I've been sympathetic towards Moulton, thanks to my own experiences with the same editors, but that sympathy is waning.
(Personally, I still wonder why Jimbo needed to be brought in, as it seems that a custodian on Wikiversity should have been able to take care of it. Not to be overly insulting to SB_Johnny, since he actually stepped up to do the initial short-term block, but I do wonder where the rest of the custodians' cojones are. It doesn't speak well that I, of all people, was the one that ended up removing her name from the edits.)
For the record, he called her by her first
and last name on another page, both on the page and in the edit comment. I blocked him for 2 hours while I ran around looking for someone to oversight it.
As for the whole "how did Jimbo get involved thing", yes, it was a total failure of cojones on our collective parts (on my part especially). But we
did not ask him to do something, we certainly did not seek him out, and the reasons he gave were not the ones we thought he was going to give (or at least not the ones we thought we were supposed to have agreed to).
Honestly, it was a big whirlwind, we were busy working on
a bigger problem at the time, and the way it went down was a bit of a shock. Next time we can get together we'll try to figure out who thought what and when (there was very little first-person correspondence involved), and we'll air it out on the colloquium (as opposed to here... why so nosy?). Just be patient: unlike Moulton, JWSchmidt, and Jimbo, the others involved have actual jobs and/or other responsibilities, and we've already spent more time than we had to spare lately :-).