Let's not pretend that it didn't happen.
Actually at the time Carbonite blocked Joeyramoney the first time, he
*did* do so with the summary "user identifies himself as a pedophile"
and in the deletion discussion he said:
"Just for the record, I plan on indefinitely blocking anyone who uses
this template. If someone wants to announce their disgusting tendency
to have sexual thoughts about children, so be it. You're not welcome
here though. I'd also block anyone identifying themselves as a rapist
or murderer. The only user to currently include this template is
User:Joeyramoney. He's now been blocked"
He then made the following announcement on the administrators' noticeboard:
"The userbox Template:User pedophile is a great way of identifying
those users who consider themselves to be pedophiles. I plan on
indefinitely blocking any user who includes this template. I've
already blocked the only user to include this template,
User:Joeyramoney. Wikipedia has no obligation to permit deviants to
edit. If a someone has sexual thoughts about children, keep it to
yourself and stay off Wikipedia. I can't even imagine the PR nightmare
that the Wikimedia Foundation would face if articles were being
written by self-identified pedophiles."
Of course Carbonite's action was utterly unacceptable, but let's not
airbrush it out of history. Later blocks on Joeyramoney where on the
basis of the assumption that he did so in a deliberate attempt to
provoke. There is evidence that he did not intend this, or at least
that when he realised what a fuss he had caused he acted sensibly and
removed the template.