I would like to come in in the "middle" of this and offer that we (well, I) only have access to half (a third?) the story. I've read Keith's blog, too, but I don't know what Patrick has to say, and so far Malibu has opted expressly not to say anything about the matter.

First, Malibu is the owner of the site and, in that capacity, I believe he can do whatever he darn well pleases. That's the grand beauty of ownership. He's no idiot, either, and I'm sure he has calculated that not responding to this situation in a more public way is a risk, even if that response is to people that are not directly affected by the catalyzing incident. Whether that is the wise position to take in this regard is subject to debate, but ultimately it is his call.

Second, all that said, it would be my suggestion (for whatever that's worth) that it might be in the best interests of the site that something resembling the "other side" be posted. I realize that moderation activities are often something done quietly, and for good reason. However, with one affected party having chosen to "go public" with their perspective, now we know that imaginations, extrapolations, inferences, and theories are running unchecked about the actions and beliefs of the other involved parties, none of which is an accurate representation of reality.

As I said, I don't presume to tell Malibu how to run his site. It would be my most respectful suggestion, however, that he consider offering his "side" (and I hate to use that term). I can't make any conclusions about what's going on until I have as much hard information as possible. Surely others here would not want to make decisions about leaving okctalk on the basis of incomplete information. There's good to be had here, and while many of us differ (sometimes intensely) on a wide variety of things, it would be a shame for the site in general to be imperiled by this incident.

-soonerdave