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)

[Angela Kennedy]

I'm a little confused as to what you're accusing me of. You seem to be conflating Moulton's problems at WP with his at WV. I know I'm not the only one that felt he was treated unfairly during his original experience on WP, but condemn his behavior on WV.

Look, I'm not interested in power games. I just work on a few projects now and then because it interests me. All I want is for people not to make that more difficult than necessary, and will support the ability for others to do the same (within reason). I tried to help Moulton before he was even blocked the first time on WP. As a result of opposing those editors and associating with Moulton, I've been attacked and lied about.

I attempted to help him on WP, but that doesn't mean I was going to unconditionally support him in his attempt to turn the WV Ethics project into a platform for a feud. Take, for example, his supposed "case study", in which he argues his case, complete with a hyperbolic reference to Kristalnacht. That's not what case studies are for. I agreed that it should be removed as inappropriate for the project, and gave specific criteria for what a case study would need to look like when Moulton complained. However, Moulton continued to complain about my removal without giving a single reason why it should be considered a case study after all.

Perhaps you'd like a couple of examples of how Moulton played power games himself? It seems he was perfectly fine with shutting down discussion through rude behavior and sheer verbosity.

Whoa there! I haven't accused YOU of anything. I've said why the WHOLE case against Moulton looks weak. You've provided rambling diffs it would take me far too long to read- what are the actual EXAMPLES of ad hominem, 'lies', using power abusviely etc. I referred to in my earlier post?

Verbosity and hyperbole cannot form part of this case of wrongdoing- as I said before, there'd have to be a mass cull if this was the case (and you and I would be in the queue to get offed- as well as most of WR, WP and Guardian Journalists, to name just a few).

Moulton- please don't think I'm sitting in judgement of you either- I don't like how this is turning into somewhat of a witch-hunt against you frankly.

And just to be clear- I AM talking about the sitch at WV- which is part of the WMF, is it not? There's a whole new potential thread that could be formed on whether a Jim Wales venture (even an ostensible 'academic' one) is going to run into the same problems as WP per se in terms of culture and power games in the production of knowledge- a ubiquitous problem, yes: but as we have seen before, Wikipedia projects have specific problems in these areas.

This post has been edited by Angela Kennedy: Fri 3rd October 2008, 7:59am