Talk:Crush! Yiff! Destroy!/archive1

From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
If it is gone for good, it will be sorely missed as one of the last good furry community sites out there. A link to maybe a wayback machine archive would be appropriate for people interested in what it was all about.-- 03:06, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
While I can't agree on the content of the site, we can certainly add a link to the archived version. It has been added to the article. --Dmuth 03:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Probably just temporarily down. If they were having server problems, they may just be shopping around for a better site. Spirou 06:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Crush! Yiff! Destroy! is just a neo-Burned Furry group

Anyone who contributes to the Kaze articles should be stalked, harrassed and ridiculed:

Anyone who doesn't believe Dr. Laura's line on zoophilia should be stalked, harrassed, flamewarred even at the expense of following the rules of places such as FurryMUCK: (though notably RF was banned, the topic continues to inspire additional stalking and harrassing attacks from more and more users on FurryMUCK, and although there were obviously many on this thread joining in the mob inventions and plotting, she seems to have been the only one)

But remember, they insist all of this is meant in jest, even though they actually do stalk and harrass, organizing and launching these mob attacks from their own forums. -- --Chibiabos 07:10, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikifur is a lot of things related to the compilation of present or historical data in relation to the Furry Fandom. What is not is a pulpit to a express personal POV on people or groups within the culture, no matter how strongly you may feel about it,... Neutrality is a must when working on a project that balances so many contradicting and diverse views or opinions. The moment we take on a position, all credibility of fairness is lost Spirou 07:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
The article, as it is, is not neutral; its very overly gentle on CYD, and any contributions that contradict it being a harmless, humorous site/group are reverted quickly. The article is, in fact, not neutral. Those threads, and several more I found in other searches, show the group to be an anti-furry mob there to organize attacks on Wikifur, FurryMUCK and other "furry venues" to stalk and harrass anyone who likes Kaze, for instance, or happens to be zoophile. No debate on these topics, just concerted anti-fur mob rallying. --Chibiabos 07:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Its interesting how I steer clear of editing their naysaying, with no real supporting evidence, of such furry topics of interest as Kaze: Ghost Warrior, fearing I'd harm the NPOV by removing their criticisms, empty as they seem to me, but that wiki professional courtesy is not extended to me when it comes to pointing out they are not as harmless as they claim. --Chibiabos 08:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


What citations would be valid for "Furry apologists venturing into the forums are generally judged on the basis of their behavior in the forums alone rather than on their posts elsewhere on the Internet" ? There are plenty of famous and "fence-sitting" furries who seem to be hastening the apocalypse posting on CYD: Miss Mab, Sian Silverhair, Seraph, Sage Freehaven, Micah Fennec, Banrai, many others. A couple of these are judged a little more harshly for being drama whores or just irritating freaks but in general these are valued posters to the forums. Perhaps a simple note about this, without naming names, would suffice? --DS|go 10:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Except CYD has a long history established history of attacking lesser-known furs, such as myself (who the f--- knows who I am, really?) which contradicts that claim. --Chibiabos 10:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Other than your hateful quotes calling CYD another Burned Furs group, I really don't know you! But, the statement in the article is about furries who've joined the forums - again, I don't know you, and I don't think you've ever joined. I don't suppose you'd like to, but you can always try. Any furries who can laugh at themselves and admit their kinks are pretty silly usually get along just fine. If you'd like to change the statment -- perhaps say that furries who join the forums are treated better than those who haven't -- I feel that might be more fair. Thanks. =^.^= --DS|go 10:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I've discovered several threads on CYD using the search function on the forum where I am "discussed" on CYD as a "dog rapist" and gay servant to Timothy Albee. RailFoxen mentioned he'd even like to kill my last ex, Ebonlupus, and made up quite a few things about him as well. The voices on CYD were pretty much unified in these allegations and lynch mob rallies to do things to people like myself, and I saw not a single dissenting was voiced. Although RailFoxen is banned, no one else participating in these torch-and-pitchfork mobs shows to have been banned. There is no way in Texas I'd voluntarily place myself in the CYD fire spit to endure this abuse closer to your source. --Chibiabos 17:00, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I request any citations Chibiabos wishes to add appear here first, so they may be debated before appearing in the article proper. It's in my opinion most of his citations do not remotely support his venemous claims. I would prefer consensus among the Wikifurries before the claims are replaced. --DS|go 23:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

You gave no basis for erasing supported statements. Your efforts to force a whitewash of CYD are against the spirit of wiki. You must abide by the same rules as everyone else, and the fact that CYD's own actions venomize is image is their fault, not mine. Please cease and desist editwarring. --Chibiabos 23:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC) - This thread displays a Bubsy videogame advert in which Bubsy makes comments humorously similar to those made by furries, regarding intellectual property use. Nothing about religion or spirituality. Suggest it not appear. --DS|go 00:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Very first post in the thread: "The spiritual furry godfather." referring to the image in the post as demeanment from an anti-furry group against spiritual furs. --Chibiabos 00:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC) - This thread pokes fun at Chibiabos' discussion of Nazis relating to Kaze: Ghost Warrior, and his inability to preview his changes to the same. Also calls Chibiabos and Albee's fiction disrespective of their sources. Nothing about religion or spirituality. Suggest it not appear. --DS|go 00:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

"... perfectly explain why the man falls asleep jacking off to the wannabe Japanese wankfest of Kaze." Another false sexual claim made against me, which is a recurrent theme for CYD -- painting every fur and everything furs do as having some sexual basis. If you don't like the image some might get of CYD based on the behavior on CYD forums, I'm not the one to rail at.
"Speaking of Albee, I don't think he's a furry. Rather, I think he's one of those "I am one with nature" types that yearn to cast off their unsightly flesh and become an animal, because they're so nature-ly and shit. These are the same people that love anything to do with American Indians, beacuse they're, like, Spiritual and Noble and they're One with Nature and they co-existed with animals and took only what they needed, and drone, dither, dictate." Another strike on furrydom, spirituality, and beliefs in the same thread. --Chibiabos 00:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
And that's a strike -how-? --Kitetsu 13:44, 2 October 2006 (Australian Time)
Setting aside the fact I think its a strong misrepresentation of Albee's actual beliefs, its very demeaning and belittling of a professionally accomplished fur's beliefs. I know I stand alone in the belief that one's spirituality is every bit as private and intimate as one's physically intimacy, but my experience at suffering sexual harrassment at the hands of a female superior when I was in basic training and a sexual assault I endured years later compares with the same feeling of humiliation and demeanment as biblethumpers not taking 'no' for an answer the first time from me, and empathy forces me to see the same spiritual harrassment when I see such blatant disrespect for the spiritual beliefs of others. It is no less violating than sexual assault. --Chibiabos 04:18, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Um, shouldn't that be Albee's decision to make?
Anyway, on the subject of harassment from CYD, I find it odd that, given their popularity, we have not seen any other complaints. With the number of people in this fandom who like to complain about nearly anything, I'd expect that if harassment was widespread and/or condoned by their moderators, that it would be all over Google and/or Usenet by now. Case in point, the following searches failed to turn up anything of interest in the first few matches:
The best I've seen so far are meanspirited and vague comments directed about a few individuals on CYD's own forums, and one admin (RailFoxen) who went a little ballistic on FurryMUCK and has since been banned from CYD.
--Douglas Muth 14:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Albee does not patrol wikifur, nor do many of CYD's threats, harrassment and libel victims, but CYD has been targetting him for quite some time as they have myself. Further, RailFoxen has not been banned from CYD; in fact his actions continue to be authorized and condoned by CYD, such as the fictional "article" he wrote at published just yesterday (October 1). RailFoxen continues to threaten, harrass, and commit libel against private individuals like myself as he has for over a year, and he does so representing CYD. Any attempts by CYD, in fact, to claim he is not authorized or condoned is proven false by this "article." It has taken me a year, in fact, to discover the source of ongoing threats, harrassment and intimidation waged against me in FurryMUCK. --Chibiabos 14:21, 2 October 2006 (UTC) - This thread directly insults furry appropriations of both old and new religious imagery, illustrating how the furry versions differ from the mainstream versions of these religions. This might possibly be an 'attack'. Suggest discussion. --DS|go 00:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

CYD again asserts itself as dictator over others' spiritual beliefs in this thread. Again, this is an attack on furs with spiritual beliefs which supports my statement; this is what CYD is, this is what CYD does, there is zero intent to convey respect or understanding and everything is about defecating on someone else's spiritual beliefs. --Chibiabos 00:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC) - Not attacks, so much as honest opinions and reviews of fursuit videos taken from Anthrocon. This could be a signature thread, useful as an example discussion. Suggest it be placed elsewhere. --DS|go 00:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

This is an attack on fursuiters and establishes CYD is anti-fursuit. --Chibiabos 00:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC) - This thread was so amazingly idiotic I locked it and threatened to banish everyone involved. We might leave it in the article as an example of why CYD dislikes unfunny attacks by immature anti-furries on the fandom. Suggest discussion. --DS|go 00:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

This is exemplary of the behaviors I and others suffer that originate from the CYD forums on FurryMUCK and elsewhere. Months after RailFoxen was banned, his messages and threads attract new individuals, such as Nikii on FurryMUCK (CYD alias unknown). This is who CYD appeals to and this is the behavior CYD exudes. The thread is very much still there, as are the threads describing me as a "dog rapist" and a list of other false, unsupported claims. Of course, I realize, CYD forums can be run as you see fit, and that you choose not to let facts get in the way of your entertainment is your choice, but it is not the job of wikifur to whitewash CYD's behavior, and eliminating links documenting your behavior from your own forums is bad faith editing. --Chibiabos 00:25, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Additional quotables

"If you have a minute, could you help provide me the names of some alleged (and in some cases, admitted) bestialists associated with the fandom, and possibly some links to where I can find out more about them?" Quite a bit of volunteered help outing private citizens with no information they've been convicted of anything:

"Otherkin, by far, are the worst for me. Not only do they have one of the most retarded belief systems ever, but they're also cocky in general (i.e. "I laugh at those dumb hy00mans who can't comprehend my dragon spirit"

"furiend? fursonality? what the FUCK!? Someone shoot this bastard down!" / "furst" / "I'm all in favor of tye-dye furries... as long as we get to tie them in knots, make sure the dye is suitably scalding hot, and they are wearing their suits at the time."

I'll waste more time later on this. --Chibiabos 01:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

RailFoxen is still active with CYD and harrassing specific furs is organization-enforced

Despite claims on my own user talk page that RailFoxen is banned and no longer on or active with CYD, they published an article on October 1st written by him featured on the front page of the Crush! Yiff! Destroy! website that indicates despite the public ban, he is still active and driving CYD attacks on individual furs. Ref: ... This appears to contradict assertions - Ref: by CYD administrator Downspin that RailFoxen is no longer associated with their organization and that such behavior is not associated with their organization.

Note the article claims "In preface, CrushYiffDestroy! LLC maintains no corporate position towards bestiality." in strong opposition to the views expressed and shared among CYD administrators on their forum (searching for "zoophilia" on the CYD forums shows it always to be described as rape and non-consentual, clearly the official position of CYD despite the preface claim to the contrary, and Raiya -- apparantly still active and participating in CYD including his behavior crying out "Dog rapist" in the West Corner of The Park (location) on FurryMUCK. The organization clearly still has active, if not public, ties with Raiya and supports and encourages his stalking and harrassive behavior on FurryMUCK as well as Nikii, KateGod and other informal associates, and there appears to be a contradiction between its public and practiced policies. --Chibiabos 02:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


No matter what a person, group or community does, what somebody may be, or what you perceived that they did (even if they did,) or how you feel about it, if you wish to help in a site such as Wikifur, you must remain neutral in relation to these topics in this encyclopedia, as your actions and comments here may influence how people view Wikifur's position on these matters,...

In other words, standing in a talk page's soapbox, and proclaiming that Mitch, Downspin, Railfoxen, CYD or Sibe are BAD PEOPLE! only shows that you feel waaay too strongly about these subjects, to the point that reading your comments may feel that you're (and by association, Wikifur) not keeping an objective, impartial view on this project.

...even if you are right. Spirou 03:54, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Trying to keep articles whitewashed from facts that contradict articles that make no mention of harmfulness individuals or groups is not impartial. There is often more than one side to an article, and keeping only those who haven't been harmed by a group or individual (or, in Sibe's case, only those who don't view his abusive behavior as intolerable and unacceptable) fails to meet the standard of neutrality. Neutrality and impartiality means all facts must be considered and none discarded unless there is evidence of falsehood or corruption, even if accepting certain facts is against long-held beliefs and assumptions of the majority that things are okay.
I'm clearly making no friends here, but I am trying to make a stand for truth. This is getting way off topic, even for the talk page of this article, but I'm tired of sitting down and shutting up, which I realize most people who see my edits and posts wish I would just do. I wish I could tell you I was wrong about Sibe, that he's not so bad -- but I cannot, because that would be untrue. I wish I could tell you I was mistaken about CYD, but I cannot because that would be untrue. Their administrators have clearly lied and deceived any they gave the impression to that they were harmless, did not target specific furries for harm, that they severed affiliations with extreme members like RailFoxen whom actively stalk and harrass furs like myself as RailFoxen has for a long time now on FurryMUCK, or that.
I've sat down and shut up, or more accurately shut up and ran away, for years now. I may not be a particularly good wikifurrian, but I feel my contributions are of value and wikifur is my only real opportunity to represent the badly under-represented truth in the furry fandom. A lot of widely, commonly held behaviors and activities are, in fact, harmful. I don't think everyone who accepts these behaviors is necessarly sadistic, I think most just aren't conscious of the consequences of their activities.
Yes, I have a vested interest; yes, I am hurting from bullies in and around the fandom. There's a long held axiom in anthropology that there is no such thing as pure objectivity; everyone has a unique combination of experiences that make for a unique perspective, and no one perspective is the one "right" one. Only when a great variety of different perspectives are brought to bear on a subject can some semblance of objectivity be approached. While I may give the appearance that I only represent myself, I know there are others still hiding, hoping someone will represent them and what they are going through. They are presently ignored and swept away by the "stop the drama" whiners.
My perspectives, then, liked or not, should not be so readily discarded and ignored should objectivity be a goal. The CYD forums are certainly not objective. Wikifur's articles are not, either, but they are, at least, much closer.
I know it is not a goal of wikifur, but I think wikifur can bring some sanity to the furry fandom by helping to clear up misconceptions and allowing furs a chance to view all the facts, not just the "everything is okay" whitewashed ones.
I doubt I'll gain or regain respect from most folk anytime soon, but I hope at least some few find value in my efforts, nervously unsteady as they are. --Chibiabos 04:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Disagreements with the article at unlocking

First, I hope my above points I made during its lockdown period will be considered. Clearly my attempts to -- from my perspective -- improve the neutrality of the article not only failed but outright backfired, as it seems no one concerned with this article (besides myself) seemed to feel my edits had merit. I hope, then, that someone can read, consider and give feedback on the following points:

I see a lot of what seem, to me, to be subjective statements in the article presented as objective, specifically:

  • "Advocating and/or committing vandalism against furry online resources is explicitly forbidden by the site's owner, who has banned people for this." This seems to be in doubt, since it was claimed by Mitch, Downspin and others (and several seemed to perceive) that RailFoxen's behavior was atrocious enough for him to get banned (and note the statement makes no representation that banning is constrained to the forums), but obviously he is still very much affiliated with the site and conducts his research trolling FurryMUCK and other forums. The other day, in fact, he quoted an e-mail address of mine from formal e-mails I had sent to both Mitch as CYD admin and Mitch's ISP regarding the libel page; clearly that user proclaimed as banned has ready access, influence and control over CYD administartion -- hardly sounds like its forbidden and bannable.
  • "Favourite front-page topics at CYD include the political antics of the webmasters of popular furry sites, stories and fanfiction, online drama and overreaction, furry spirituality and fursuits." Are these all referenced and objective facts, or are they all subjective and written from the perspective of the article's target? Isn't this anti-neutral?
  • "... a very diverse selection of furry and non-furry discussion ... " Is it really diverse, or is it written from their majority perspective of those who view taunting and teasing private individuals with vastly different beliefs and lifestyles is acceptable, and that such individuals shouldn't be allowed to call themselves furry?
  • "... most always focusing on the absurd or silly behavior of the subjects." Oops. This is the continuation of the above, and my same neutrality complaint as for my second bulleted point.
  • "CYD also provides an extensive collection of documents valuable to those researching early fandom history." I would certainly contest that its documents are factual; in fact, their "valuable" document on myself is at the same time libellous and sexually harrassing, and their composing and posting it in a public place could constitute a criminal act. They have a similarly factless, tactless and valueless document on Ebonlupus. While not all would agree with my assessment, I hope at least one other might contend the claim that the CYD "articles" are all "valuable" is not a universal and objective claim

I hope skilled, experienced Wikifurrians with experience in setting aside their personal opinions might consider my points and adjust the article accordingly, as appropriate, should at least one of my points show merit. --Chibiabos 06:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

What —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
As I've stated before, Railfoxen is banned from the forums. There is no such thing as a banishment from the front page. There is no evidence in the Chibi article that Rail trolled any MUCK or forum for his information (if Rail did, wouldn't he be banished from these MUCKs and forums?) As there's no evidence of trolling or encouragement of trolling in the article, we had no problem posting it to the front page. Advocating or comitting vandalism -- if discussed on the forums -- is still grounds for banishment from the forums. If someone wishes to slightly modify that statement, they may.
Generally, the articles are referenced and objective, with obvious sarcasm and opinion added around the factual information. Articles lacking research and references are pulled, if ever posted -- the first draft of the recent WTFur article was pulled for that reason. Also I refer readers to a statement about neutrality.
Forum topics are diverse. This is hard to tell by searching the forum only for 'railfoxen', 'spirituality', and 'fursuits', but true. Of course everything in the Atrocity Archive is held in disdain, that's why it's named the Atrocity Archive. Look elsewhere in the forum for our fans of Jack, Better Days, and Lackadaisy Cats.
CYD doesn't focus on things unless they're patently and continuously absurd. This is why Karl Jorgensen is a regular fixture of discussion, and Kelly Price is not.
Finally, Chibi can pretend his article is libellous all he wishes, but in truth it's fair and factual. His claim that CYD posts libel is, in fact, libel. However, CYD does not attempt to cow dissenters into submission with cease and desist orders. Everyone can see our ivory tower, we don't need to worry about liars who want to call it black. =^.~= --DS|go 21:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Where's the copy of my criminal record showing I've been convicted, or even charged, with the sexual crimes you've accused me of? Nowhere in the real world, only in the fiction you write and claim as fact. --Chibiabos 01:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)