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)

[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.

[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).

[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: Mon 15th September 2008, 2:17pm

[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.