Moulton blocked on WV by Jimbo, !!! Options

[Rootology]

http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?titl...=User%3AMoulton

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity..._for_incivility

Block of Moulton for incivility

After discussion with other admins, in which I was requested to personally make this block, I have indef blocked Moulton from this project. It is my belief that he was not here in a good faith effort to create learning materials, but rather was here to carry out his ongoing campaign against people who he thinks treated him unfairly at Wikipedia. After reviewing his case at Wikipedia, I think this is clearly not the case: he was properly blocked at Wikipedia, and should be blocked on sight from any Wikimedia project where he surfaces with a similar agenda.

I would recommend that a significant number of the attack pages be deleted, and the project protected at least for now, pending a good community discussion of what something like this should look like.

There are always difficult growing pains for young commuities; I have seen it in many languages and many projects. I encourage Wikiversity to review the "ethics" project - which, it seems to me could be an interesting project if handled appropriately - with an eye towards developing principles for dealing with such projects in the future. One idea that I would like to propose is an explicit ban on "case studies" using real examples of non-notable people, in exchange for hypotheticals. I would also like to encourage you to consider clarifying the scope of Wikiversity to make it more clear that it is not a place for people to come and build attack pages in the guise of learning materials.

In any event, I hope that my action here will be viewed as helpful. I did not act quickly, but only after discussion with important people, and only after hearing that 3 bureaucrats support this action. It is not my intention to be the "God King" of Wikiversity, although I do request that this block only be overturned upon a very careful consideration of the possible implications for the future of the project.

The first major internal conflict and ban is always tough. My thoughts are with you, and I wish you well.--Jimbo Wales 19:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

[Ottava]

I just had all parties agree to a three day work exercise for Moulton followed by a peer review process in order to discuss community issues and the rest.

Sigh.

Don't I have the best luck with timing.

If he would have only done this a day or two before, I wouldn't have wasted so many hours putting together all the necessary parts.

[the fieryangel]

I just had all parties agree to a three day work exercise for Moulton followed by a peer review process in order to discuss community issues and the rest.

Sigh.

Don't I have the best luck with timing.

If he would have only done this a day or two before, I wouldn't have wasted so many hours putting together all the necessary parts.

I wrote about the "Moulton" aspects of this situation on the other thread. But the Jimbo aspects are quite another thing: he's not a Godking, but he's going to be one just this once? And although he's not a GodKing, Moulton is effectively "banished from the realm"?

Constitutional Monarch, Jimbo? Do they banish people?

This is rather a radical turn of events, in any case...

[Ottava]

I wrote about the "Moulton" aspects of this situation on the other thread. But the Jimbo aspects are quite another thing: he's not a Godking, but he's going to be one just this once? And although he's not a GodKing, Moulton is effectively "banished from the realm"?

Constitutional Monarch, Jimbo? Do they banish people?

This is rather a radical turn of events, in any case...

We do not know who the "three bureaucrats" were. We do not know who he was talking to. As many people have said, they saw this coming. Jimbo has the ability to move between projects based on his special status, so he was a likely person to turn to.

[dtobias]

Constitutional Monarch,[/i] Jimbo? Do they banish people?

I remember as a kid on my first trip outside the United States, to Canada, I actually had some concerns after seeing that the coins of that country featured a Queen, given that my past experience with queens was dominated by Alice in Wonderland's Queen of Hearts, who was prone to yelling "Off with your head!"... I really thought that when visiting a country with a queen, you were in constant risk of having her see you in the street, decide she doesn't like you, and have you executed.

----------------
Now playing: Melissa Etheridge - I Want To Come Over
via FoxyTunes

[Shalom]

I wrote about the "Moulton" aspects of this situation on the other thread. But the Jimbo aspects are quite another thing: he's not a Godking, but he's going to be one just this once? And although he's not a GodKing, Moulton is effectively "banished from the realm"?

Constitutional Monarch, Jimbo? Do they banish people?

This is rather a radical turn of events, in any case...

We do not know who the "three bureaucrats" were. We do not know who he was talking to. As many people have said, they saw this coming. Jimbo has the ability to move between projects based on his special status, so he was a likely person to turn to.

There are only five bureaucrats on Wikiversity. Of the "three bureaucrats" involved, SB Johnny and Cormaggio are almost certainly two, as they support the ban later in the discussion. The other might be either Mu301 or Erkan Yilmaz. Sebmol has been inactive since May 2008.

Except for SB Johnny, I don't recognize any of these names.

[wikiwhistle]

I wrote about the "Moulton" aspects of this situation on the other thread. But the Jimbo aspects are quite another thing: he's not a Godking, but he's going to be one just this once? And although he's not a GodKing, Moulton is effectively "banished from the realm"?

Constitutional Monarch, Jimbo? Do they banish people?

This is rather a radical turn of events, in any case...

As an aside, a similar thing took place with the block of Peter Damian. I don't know what Moulton's edits were like on WV, but it seems a shame as I thought he was getting on a lot better with the editors there than at WP.

[Ottava]

There are only five bureaucrats on Wikiversity. Of the "three bureaucrats" involved, SB Johnny and Cormaggio are almost certainly two, as they support the ban later in the discussion. The other might be either Mu301 or Erkan Yilmaz. Sebmol has been inactive since May 2008.

Except for SB Johnny, I don't recognize any of these names.

The definition of support can mean a lot of things, so lets not focus too heavily on this. The community knew about some problems Jimbo was having with Moulton weeks ago.

This post has been edited by Ottava:

[Peter Damian]

This is better than Harold Pinter.

My theory of the source of our differences is that it's the basic science vs politics dichotomy, which also manifests as the observation vs control dichotomy (in feedback control theory), as the functions vs rules dichotomy (as in systems theory), and as the candor vs hypocrisy dichotomy (as in theology). In other words, if I say, "Be ye not deceived," and you respond, "How can we get to the ground truth?", I answer "By means of the protocols of the scientific method and the tools of epistemology." If you ask, "How may we resolve a conflict?", I respond "By applying the techniques of Action Research and Conflict Resolution, as proposed by subject-matter experts in those fields." But I cannot compel my antagonist to become a scholar if his preference is to be a thespian. But if his preference is to be a thespian, then I propose to apply the analytical tools of Drama Theory to study the resulting lunatic social drama. —Moulton 06:27, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Is someone going to do something to stop this from continuing, or should one expect to be subject to repeated and unending personal attacks at this project? Salmon of Doubt 12:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you like to enter into a mutually agreeable Social Contract, setting forth mutually agreeable terms of engagement? —Moulton 13:07, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

No. Salmon of Doubt 13:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Salmon, if you don't respond to him, than he will probably leave you alone. You could spend your time in a different way here on Wikiversity.--Daanschr 14:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I will return to my policy of ignoring everything he writes. Salmon of Doubt 14:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Moulton]

This is got to be an embarrassment for WMF.

Jimbo Wales' sole contribution to Wikiversity since its inception:

[[Special:Contributions/Jimbo_Wales]]

[Milton Roe]

This is got to be an embarrassment for WMF.

Jimbo Wales' sole contribution to Wikiversity since its inception:

[[Special:Contributions/Jimbo_Wales]]

Well, what the hell did you expect him to do, write articles on quantum mechanics? It's Jimbo.

[GlassBeadGame]

This is got to be an embarrassment for WMF.

Jimbo Wales' sole contribution to Wikiversity since its inception:

[[Special:Contributions/Jimbo_Wales]]

Well, what the hell did you expect him to do, write articles on quantum mechanics? It's Jimbo.

That is funniest thing you ever wrote Milton. Congrats Moulton, an unjust personal block from Mr. Wales deserves a place on your CV.

[The Joy]

And yet another case where the independence of Foundation projects from non-community individuals like Jimbo proves to be an illusion. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mad.gif)

[Shalom]

If I were a Wikiversity admin/custodian, why would I want to invite Jimbo to block one of my users? Wikinews and Wikibooks dumped Jimbo as an admin; Wikiversity just accepted him.

[Ottava]

If I were a Wikiversity admin/custodian, why would I want to invite Jimbo to block one of my users? Wikinews and Wikibooks dumped Jimbo as an admin; Wikiversity just accepted him.

As a Wikiversity custodian, I was a little taken by surprised by the timing. Moulton was just about to enter into a three day focus on an editing project and then enter into a "peer review" discussion to help build trust between him and others of the community, including some that he had conflicts with before. I was given approval by the other custodians to continue this on his talk page.

[Shalom]

If I were a Wikiversity admin/custodian, why would I want to invite Jimbo to block one of my users? Wikinews and Wikibooks dumped Jimbo as an admin; Wikiversity just accepted him.

As a Wikiversity custodian, I was a little taken by surprised by the timing. Moulton was just about to enter into a three day focus on an editing project and then enter into a "peer review" discussion to help build trust between him and others of the community, including some that he had conflicts with before. I was given approval by the other custodians to continue this on his talk page.

When Jimbo does things like this on Wikipedia we can say he's out of touch, but at least he shows up every once in a blue moon. This was completely out of left field. If I were you, Ottava, I'd feel betrayed by admins who with one hand promoted mediation and with the other hand banned the guy you were trying to help.

[everyking]

They should unblock Moulton, tell Jimbo to butt out of their community affairs, and then make their own decision about how to handle Moulton. Jimbo apparently wasn't even aware of the circumstances, as indicated by Ottava's comments, and was probably just pursuing somebody else's grudge against Moulton.

[gomi]

If [Jimbo] would have only done this a day or two before, I wouldn't have wasted so many hours ...

Now perhaps you'll realize: all time spent on Wikipedia and related project is wasted!

[Giggy]

This is got to be an embarrassment for WMF.

Jimbo Wales' sole contribution to Wikiversity since its inception:

[[Special:Contributions/Jimbo_Wales]]

Despite my not usually being a fan of Jimbo's using his monarch powers to ban people, I must say his contributions to Wikiversity have been more valuable than yours.

They should unblock Moulton, tell Jimbo to butt out of their community affairs, and then make their own decision about how to handle Moulton. Jimbo apparently wasn't even aware of the circumstances, as indicated by Ottava's comments, and was probably just pursuing somebody else's grudge against Moulton.

The correct thing to do, even if they told Jimbo to butt out, would still be to block Moulton for pretty much the reasons given by Jimbo.

[Moulton]

The correct thing to do, even if they told Jimbo to butt out, would still be to block Moulton for pretty much the reasons given by Jimbo.

1. If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death.

The above is the very first written law in the history of human civilization, written by Hammurabi of Babylonia, some 3750 years ago.

It is now up to Jimbo Wales to come to Wikiversity and submit his evidence, reasoning, and analysis to the Assembled Community for scientific, journalistic, and judicial peer review, in accordance with Wikiversity Policy.

[thekohser]

Block of Moulton for incivility
...The first major internal conflict and ban is always tough... --Jimbo Wales 19:18, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

But once you've done it, every time you do it afterwards feels natural, even wonderful and amazing.

What, did Jimbo just pop the Wikiversity's cherry?

This is ridiculous, alarming, and completely predictable.

Is it any surprise that Jimbo blocked someone who was Participant #2 and actively crafting a forum entitled, "Ethical Management of the English Language Wikipedia"?

I mean, how much more of a shot at Jimbo did it have to be?!

[Kelly Martin]

They should unblock Moulton, tell Jimbo to butt out of their community affairs, and then make their own decision about how to handle Moulton. Jimbo apparently wasn't even aware of the circumstances, as indicated by Ottava's comments, and was probably just pursuing somebody else's grudge against Moulton.

Jimbo doesn't care what the circumstances are; all he needs to know is that one of his Valued Friends has asked him to Do The GodKing Thing (after making the genuflection appropriate to the GodKing).

[Ottava]

When Jimbo does things like this on Wikipedia we can say he's out of touch, but at least he shows up every once in a blue moon. This was completely out of left field. If I were you, Ottava, I'd feel betrayed by admins who with one hand promoted mediation and with the other hand banned the guy you were trying to help.

I don't think there is a major problem just yet unless Jimbo wants Moulton's user page blocked and no review to be given after he completes the task. That is a possibility, but I am hoping it wont happen.

[anthony]

They should unblock Moulton, tell Jimbo to butt out of their community affairs, and then make their own decision about how to handle Moulton. Jimbo apparently wasn't even aware of the circumstances, as indicated by Ottava's comments, and was probably just pursuing somebody else's grudge against Moulton.

Jimbo doesn't care what the circumstances are; all he needs to know is that one of his Valued Friends has asked him to Do The GodKing Thing (after making the genuflection appropriate to the GodKing).

I'm pretty sure Jimbo was aware of exactly the circumstances in this case. Ottava just made the mistake of assuming good faith. Jimbo doesn't want "discussion to help build trust between [Moulton] and others of the community", he just wants to "stamp out the evildoers".

Jimbo doesn't even like it when people question the perfection of "his" precious Wikipedia off-wiki. There's no way he's going to let people do it on a sister project, if he can do anything to stop it.

If anything, Jimbo's action in blocking "Moulton" more suggests that he knew there was a plan for "discussion to help build trust between [Moulton] and others of the community", and he had to work quickly to stop such a thing from happening.

This post has been edited by anthony:

[Ottava]

I'm pretty sure Jimbo was aware of exactly the circumstances in this case. Ottava just made the mistake of assuming good faith. Jimbo doesn't want "discussion to help build trust between [Moulton] and others of the community", he just wants to "stamp out the evildoers".

Jimbo doesn't even like it when people question the perfection of "his" precious Wikipedia off-wiki. There's no way he's going to let people do it on a sister project, if he can do anything to stop it.

If anything, Jimbo's action in blocking "Moulton" more suggests that he knew there was a plan for "discussion to help build trust between [Moulton] and others of the community", and he had to work quickly to stop such a thing from happening.

As per emails posting on Moulton's page, Jimbo contacted Moulton about Moulton's linking of blogs from his user pages that members of other projects found insulting.

This wasn't a questioning of "performance". Moulton's first responses, and their exchange, was harsher than needed. The community worked with him to try and tone down his response, but it was too little too late.

The recent fights with user Salmon of Doubt have probably only exacerbated the situation.

[Jon Awbrey]

I wrote about the "Moulton" aspects of this situation on the other thread. But the Jimbo aspects are quite another thing: he's not a Godking, but he's going to be one just this once? And although he's not a GodKing, Moulton is effectively "banished from the realm"?

Constitutional Monarch, Jimbo? Do they banish people?

This is rather a radical turn of events, in any case …

We do not know who the "three bureaucrats" were. We do not know who he was talking to. As many people have said, they saw this coming. Jimbo has the ability to move between projects based on his special status, so he was a likely person to turn to.

There are only five bureaucrats on Wikiversity. Of the "three bureaucrats" involved, SB Johnny and Cormaggio are almost certainly two, as they support the ban later in the discussion. The other might be either Mu301 or Erkan Yilmaz. Sebmol has been inactive since May 2008.

Except for SB Johnny, I don't recognize any of these names.

Been away, but last I looked, some Pseudo Nymed Ottava Rima was running for Custodian.

I see that the Topic I raised in the Colloquium has also been banished to a Subpage.

Any hope that Academic Freedom and Open Discussion might be more welcome there than the rest the Wikipedia Gulags can now be forgotten.

Hype Hype HooHah for Cabalversity !!!

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

This post has been edited by Jon Awbrey:

[Ottava]

Been away, but last I looked, some Pseudo Nymed Ottava Rima was running for Custodian.

I see that the Topic I raised in the Colloquium has also been banished to a Subpage.

Any hope that Academic Freedom and Open Discussion might be more welcome there than the rest the Wikipedia Gulags can now be forgotten.

Hype Hype HooHah for Cabalversity !!!

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

Ran. Ran. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Originally, there was no process to picking the "Referees", so a bunch of us talked it over, and I decided to go through the Custodian process first while we design the other process. I've been doing quite a bit of gnome work and clean up while the process continues.

[Jon Awbrey]

Been away, but last I looked, some Pseudo Nymed Ottava Rima was running for Custodian.

I see that the Topic I raised in the Colloquium has also been banished to a Subpage.

Any hope that Academic Freedom and Open Discussion might be more welcome there than the rest the Wikipedia Gulags can now be forgotten.

Hype Hype HooHah for Cabalversity !!!

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

Ran. Ran. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Originally, there was no process to picking the "Referees", so a bunch of us talked it over, and I decided to go through the Custodian process first while we design the other process. I've been doing quite a bit of gnome work and clean up while the process continues.

Yes, I know, I have just been "cleaned up".

Amazing how calling it "ethnic cleansing" made it sound so gosh-darn "civil".

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)

[that one guy]

Jimbo needs to realize that he can't always go around and block those who he doesn't like. Eventually he'll block the wrong person and then he'll have massive backlash.

[written by he who wrote it]

They should unblock Moulton, tell Jimbo to butt out of their community affairs, and then make their own decision about how to handle Moulton. Jimbo apparently wasn't even aware of the circumstances, as indicated by Ottava's comments, and was probably just pursuing somebody else's grudge against Moulton.

Probably? I think the only question is which user(s) bent his ear about this, and who (if anyone) put them up to it. Any guesses?

[Moulton]

Just as AN/Moulton divided the WP community, Jimbo's ill-advised intervention in Wikiversity has widened a chasm that was already present at Wikiversity before WAS 4.250 and I arrived there in early July.

It's the same chasm I've characterized before, and it permeates the culture at large (not just WMF-related projects).

In some ways it resembles the divide between Galileo and Pope Urban, although I'm not about to write the kind of dialogue that got Galileo into hot water with the Inquisition.

For those of you with 300 edits here, there is much more detail posted in the Moulton Thread in the 300 Club.

Jimbo showed up on the Wikiversity-en IRC channel today and our dialogue there may or may not be Galilean or Pinteresque. But it's worth a read if you want to see a 63-yr old schmeggegy scientist from MIT and the Boston Museum of Science go up against the God-King of WMF.

[Milton Roe]

Jimbo needs to realize that he can't always go around and block those who he doesn't like. Eventually he'll block the wrong person and then he'll have massive backlash.

He's after D. Tobias, now, a relatively safe target since not an admin or steward, and since he posts HERE.

Edits two and three are threats to "remove" Tobias from the project for messing with Moulton's bio. Says it's because Tobias is trying to "extend and prolong" the controversy. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Jimbo's gunna show us how NOT to do that.

Ready, Jimbo: demonstrate.

[Shalom]

Jimbo needs to realize that he can't always go around and block those who he doesn't like. Eventually he'll block the wrong person and then he'll have massive backlash.

He's after D. Tobias, now, a relatively safe target since not an admin or steward, and since he posts HERE.

Edits two and three are threats to "remove" Tobias from the project for messing with Moulton's bio. Says it's because Tobias is trying to "extend and prolong" the controversy. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Jimbo's gunna show us how NOT to do that.

Ready, Jimbo: demonstrate.

Milton, I think your mind takes you on wacky adventures sometimes, but if I should take your statement seriously, blocking Dan Tobias would be an exceedingly dumb thing for Jimbo to do (even by his own standards), and would generate exactly the kind of backlash that would undermine his power.

[everyking]

Just as AN/Moulton divided the WP community, Jimbo's ill-advised intervention in Wikiversity has widened a chasm that was already present at Wikiversity before WAS 4.250 and I arrived there in early July.

It's the same chasm I've characterized before, and it permeates the culture at large (not just WMF-related projects).

In some ways it resembles the divide between Galileo and Pope Urban, although I'm not about to write the kind of dialogue that got Galileo into hot water with the Inquisition.

For those of you with 300 edits here, there is much more detail posted in the Moulton Thread in the 300 Club.

Jimbo showed up on the Wikiversity-en IRC channel today and our dialogue there may or may not be Galilean or Pinteresque. But it's worth a read if you want to see a 63-yr old schmeggegy scientist from MIT and the Boston Museum of Science go up against the God-King of WMF.

I got a kick out of your exchange with Jimbo; reading it was well worth the time. I don't know enough to form an opinion on whether you should remain on Wikiversity, but I am certainly convinced that Jimbo is out of line in showing up on a project where he had never previously edited to unilaterally impose a ban. If the admins on Wikiversity are going to go along with that, they are only undermining their own community processes and discrediting themselves.

[JoseClutch]

Agreed - a block on Dan T. would cost Jimbo a fortune in community goodwill. Of course, Jimbo has that fortune, but I think he'd be loath to spend so much for no little.

Moultan, on the other hand, is at worst no cost, maybe net gain. Few editors, and no real "Editors of Influence ™" see the situation as a bad thing, even if they worry about project sovereignty.

[dtobias]

Edits two and three are threats to "remove" Tobias from the project for messing with Moulton's bio. Says it's because Tobias is trying to "extend and prolong" the controversy. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

Jimbo's gunna show us how NOT to do that.

Yes, it's rather weird that an edit I made nearly a month ago on a page which had no further edits over the succeeding weeks until Jimbo got there was "extending and prolonging" the controversy, while Jimbo jumping in and reverting it and threatening me with a ban much later wasn't... that's just as Bizarro-World-like as the assertion that I'm a "troll" for reverting a single-purpose drama-only account, Centaur of Attention, which seems to deserve that label much more than myself.

----------------
Now playing: Kelly Clarkson - Up to the Mountain (Featuring Jeff Beck)

Agreed - a block on Dan T. would cost Jimbo a fortune in community goodwill. Of course, Jimbo has that fortune, but I think he'd be loath to spend so much for no little.

Do I actually have that much community goodwill on my side? I'd be impressed if that were true, but it's not always clear.

----------------
Now playing: Hilary Duff - Who's That Girl?
via FoxyTunes

[Shalom]

Wait, I didn't actually read Jimbo's second and third edits to WV when I made my last comment. I didn't believe he actually said that until I read it with my own eyes.

Dan's WV contribs all have to do with the Wikipedia Ethics project. However, there's a huge difference in perception between shutting down the project versus banning an editor for his involvement with the project. Furthermore, Dan's edit to Moulton's userpage can hardly be considered trolling even by the most Draconian standard unless Moulton himself doesn't want that blog linked from his userpage.

I almost want Jimbo to make good on his threat to see what the reaction will be.

[dtobias]

I almost want Jimbo to make good on his threat to see what the reaction will be.

I still kind of like maintaining my perfect no-block record, though...

----------------
Now playing: Carly Simon - You're So Vain
via FoxyTunes

[Shalom]

I almost want Jimbo to make good on his threat to see what the reaction will be.

I still kind of like maintaining my perfect no-block record, though...

----------------
Now playing: Carly Simon - You're So Vain
via FoxyTunes

I can sympathize with that.

[Jon Awbrey]

I almost want Jimbo to make good on his threat to see what the reaction will be.

I still kind of like maintaining my perfect no-block record, though …

I always wondered if DT would get some balls someday.

I hope I'm wrong, but it looks like today is not that day.

Jon (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/cool.gif)