From WikiFur, the furry encyclopedia.
< Talk:Mix(Redirected from Talk:Mix/Archive)
Jump to: navigation, search

This article's tone needs to be improved. It's fine for a user page, but not a main article. I know what you're trying to say, Mix, but that's best put on your user page, not the article page. I'll leave it as is, but please, work on the tone a bit.Redcard 20:11, 1 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I've marked for SpD as there is little to extract from this article if it was cleaned up. And since the writer is not registered, it can't be moved to a user page. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 20:14, 1 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Well, I figured we could have at least given him the oppurtunity to create and transfer this to a user page.. that's what I was suggesting. But yeah, SpD is just as safe a bet as this is likely a drive by.Redcard 20:16, 1 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I gave it a once-over and snipped out the worst of it, and my edit is as follows. I placed it here because I am not quite sure what you're supposed to do when editing pages with delete templates on them. --Xaxtiny.png?

'NPOV' revision, first draft[edit]

Mix is a retired furry and SA good, friends with Verix and Fredryk Fox. He still loves to hang out with the group in Chicago, meet new friends in the furry fandom, but he is a were not a furry. A werehyenataur, to be exact. Part thylacine as well.

Mix has stated that he has issues with organized religion, most importantly Christianity. His hatred towards all religion has had him to believe in a philosophy of spirits and polar energy, though still open-minded towards all other philosophical debates. He then relates his own philosophy to transformations and physical shifting, though he has his doubts.

Mix has a knack for his sketchbook, stating that no one may draw in it if they intend to 'sign' their work. He says, "Artwork is supposed to capture a person's soul, not their signature," claiming that signatures make the work totally abstract.

Mix claims to be more of a Communist/Fascist sort of mind-set. Though he is more of a white-supremacist, he gives every person he meets a chance to prove themselves to him as being a well established, mannered, or cool character. His opposing views quote Mix in saying, "If they act like one, I'll call them one..." He blames racial-stupidity-creating-stereotypes on genetics and improper parenting and surroundings.

Mix is a very generous person. He's been a super-sponsor for the past years that he attended Anthrocon, volunteering as well.

Good rewrite, I'll move this on to the main article. For future reference, if you can 'save' an article by doing this, feel free to delete the SpD and replace with the tidy version. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 21:35, 1 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Anthrocon 2005 Section[edit]

This section has been reinserted for editing by User who is the subject of this article. It has been marked dubious until the facts have been established. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 13:17, 20 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I can tell you that I personally saw him at AC 2005 walking around with an 8mm video camera. He also stopped by by the Operations Office on Monday morning while I was present, asked some question, then yelled "SOMETHING AWFUL DOT COM" and ran out. He is most *definitely* a goon. --Dmuth 10:07, 20 Sep 2005 (EDT)
Please see my comment in Talk:Something Awful about the term "goon". --mwalimu 15:06, 20 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Whether he is, is not, or ever was an SA goon, certain facts stand: I saw him at Anthrocon with the camera in question, wearing the shirt in question. These facts should not be deleted. (And gosh, just because he was wearing an SA shirt and shouting about the site, how could anyone have possibly jumped to the conclusion the he's an SA goon?)--Duncan da Husky 08:10, 21 Sep 2005 (EDT)
Mix stopped by Ops on Monday (at AC2005) and asked us if we wanted "I <3 VCL" buttons. And he gave us some, which I thought was nice of him. I had actually seen him wandering around several times doing his SA routine, and although I don't think it was a particularly smart idea (because wearing a Something Awful shirt carries the same stigma as wearing a Burned Fur shirt), I also don't think he was intending to be malicious. I know he was carrying the video camera around, but AFAIK he never posted any video to SA. He's apologized and seems genuinely sorry; I certainly can't fault him for that... everyone makes mistakes. And although I'm not fond of SA, I'm also not fond of setting people up to be scapegoats. Here's hoping everyone comes out of this a little wiser. -:) —Xydexx 01:28, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

~Trying to crank out digital film from 8mm is the same as turning a steam engine train into an electric. It's 'possible' but costs tons of money to do, and LOTS of time. Besides, I promised everyone that it was for my own personal happyness and use. I don't see furs taken aside and warned to keep their stuff off SA. *shrug* Maybe I was just poking fun at why furried hate them so much and get so overdramatic like it's a big thing that needs to be in furry history as Greenreaper said. Personally, i find that what I did at AC was not malicious in anyways, moreso just plain generous, and that creating a spot on this website is irrelevant data and a waste of space that should be ignored and deleted. Look at it from the veiw as to how others see you. If you go around at an anime convention with a shirt that says 'I like furries', a few people will think that you are repulsive and assume that you are one, some will think you are crazy for admiring them, some will like you, and some will not even know what the hell you are talking about; but I doubt they will talk endlessly about how they saw some kid at the convention wearing a 'I like furries' T-shirt. Same happened to me at AC. Some thought I was a goon, some thought I was idiotic for liking their humour, some thought I was cool (especially for having the guts for wearing the shirt (this included a guy named Tim Albee)), and some/most didn't even know what the website was about. I can't beleive that you guys are making me this rudely 'infamous' character for the fact that I simply wore a T-shirt to a convention, and acted like a nice guy during my stay. I've seen the video for Texas Furcon 2004, and thank god I didn't have my car at AC... o.o... you guys went nuts in that video.

Personal message to Mix. It happened, you did it. "The moving finger writes, and, having writ, moves on. Not all thy piety nor wit shall move it back to cancel one half line, nor all thy tears wash out a word of it". If you're genuinely sorry for what you did, I'm sure that anyone reasonable will appreciate your apologies. But _don't_ try and expunge the incident from the record. If you don't want it mentioned here, I would suggest you just ask for exclusion. It _is_ what you're known for in the fandom, after all. Tevildo 12:00, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

For Mix, I have to wonder if you're kind of missing the point here. The encyclopedia entries are meant to be a record of fact. They're not about whether the actions were good or bad, or what effect they have on one's image, or the image of the fandom. Think of it as a collaborative documentation project. If a concensus is reached, well and good, if not, then the site seems scrupulous about reporting all points of view. -Ostrich! <")

I was under the impression that WikiFur is not imtended to hurt anyone. Factuality is not our only criterion. What we write should be factual, but we an not thus obliged to write everything. If Mix states that he feels this is hurtful to him, I'd favor just letting it go. We should be recording the history worth recording; I personally won't shed any tears to see less immortalization of SA here while there's so much fading art history to conserve. -- Sebkha(talk) 13:45, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Unforchantly, deciding what 'deserves' to go in is not yet a policy I think we have. Nor would I personally want one as any and all facts are worth recording IMHO. Either way, I have clearly stated facts and opinion now so this issue should be considered resolved. Any further blanking of the article will lead to those users getting longer blocks. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 13:48, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I understand your point, Sebkha, but at the same time I think it's worthy of note that Mix is a known "problem child" for multiple furry conventions. Whether he feels it is hurtful or not, his behavior is a matter of record, and therefore a part of the history of furry fandom, just as interactions with SA are a part of the history of furry fandom. I think including the bad with the good helps to provide context for the fandom overall, and as time goes on will provide as accurate a picture of the fandom as possible.--Duncan da Husky 13:54, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
~I've never done anything 'bad' at furry or anime conventions. What the hell are you talking about Duncan? Can you IM me or something about why you keep saying this? Hell, I support the charities, super-sponsor at times when I have money to spare, and I ALWAYS volunteer. Which conventions do you speak of? (Tell me on messenger though, not on here, I WANT to know 'the rumours')

From YOUR Policy & guidelines page:
Excluding people entirely
Some people do not want information about them to be present in WikiFur. Some have retired from the furry fandom and want nothing to do with it, others feel it is too likely that people who do not like them will post information about them. This should not be abused to censor certain information but not other information: if the information is valid but the person concerned still does not want it posted, then it is probably best to just offer them the option of blanking their page entirely.
( I just don't want to be 'profile'd on this website. I don't want my name on this website. I don't want anything involving me or my actions on this website.)
The 'question' I asked on monday to SnowPony and everyone else was if the wanted some free 'I (heart) VCL' buttons that I was passing out to everyone at the con, I think only one person wanted one in the room...
I'm really a nice guy, I don't deserve this. You guys say that if I don't want it mentioned, it shouldn't be mentioned. Why are you guys trying so hard to see that it does remain a stain on me? It wasn't intentional.
There's about 100 posts about that shit now in other LJs from the LAFF list, and guess what, it's all rumours and assumptions made from this wikifur junk.
Thanks to this website, I can be possibly kicked out of my apartment (I'm scared because a fur owns it, and he doesn't like me much because of what he read on here I think), I'm losing old friends and potential friends, because everyone wants to bitch about me doing nothing else but 'wearing a shirt to a convention' Can you smell the drama that just has to be here for some reason?
I am trembling/possible suicide feelings. Again: I just don't want to be 'profile'd on this website. I don't want my name on this website. I don't want anything involving me or my actions on this website. Take ANY mention of me and my actions off this website. Please...
If you don't, well, I'll just deem the furry culture a bunch of jerks that crave drama for the rest of my life I guess. But I won't stop fighting for information about me to be deleted off this website!
Actions carry consequences. Do not even TRY to pretend that you're somehow a "victim" here. Let this be a learning experience and change how you act in the future. --Dmuth 15:55, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
It wasn't an action at all. Just because I wore a damn t-shirt means that I have to face this and endless rumours about this? I acted good at your convention, I was a super-sponsor, a volunteer, I don;'t need to be treated like this. No one seriously needs this information!!! Follow your policies of your website! I am not a furry, I am not a goon, I do not want anything posted about me on this website because it is giving others the reason to make up dumb rumours about me that are hurting me and my life. Why is this furry fandom so creul? Leave me alone! No one else talks about me, why do you insist?! TAKE ME OFF THIS DAMN WEBSITE!!!
I believe that particular section also says "If you really have done something particularly bad, or worked up a documented history of misdemeanors, you're going to have to live with that." I fail to see how being a goon at a con is a crime punishable by proverbial tar-and-feathering, but you may also want to keep that in mind while discussing this. I don't know Mix personally, so I'll try and let better discretion kick in here. --Scani 16:18, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I've looked. I don't see any proof for the assertions in the above two paragraphs following the LJ link. From what I can get that is based on their real interaction and personal knowledge of you - they don't mention WikiFur at all.
To take a few examples, there's nothing on here about you cuddling other people, and "The SA thing: back in July you posted from AC about how people were giving you shit about your SA shirt." suggests a post on (by yourself). WikiFur wasn't even founded until the end of July.
There is also a fair amount of stuff on here favourable to you. I would argue that perhaps the section about AC should be at the AC or SA pages rather than here, otherwise this whole page is likely to disappear shortly, which I would like to avoid.
Note that the fact that you were at a convention and did certain things is not something most would consider "personal information", and so it is unlikely that there is cause to remove that from other articles on those grounds. You can argue that it is not relevant, or that it is not a fair coverage of the facts, but if it is factually accurage and deemed to be relevant then . . . well, them's the breaks. As Duncan said, if you did something and regret it, that's cool, and we'll say that you do when it's mentioned so that people get the whole story, but it doesn't mean we'll pretend it never happened. --GreenReaper(talk) 16:28, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)


I recommend we follow Mix's wishes and blank his pages as desired. To do anything otherwise because of his stature as or not as a member of SA flies in the face of what we've done for other people here who've requested exclusion/personal control, and shows an over arching NPOV nature and bias of the administration. Whether or not it is affecting his life as he says it is, it is clearly hurting someone and is now being done in strictly a vindictive manner.

Blank his pages and lock them. Please. Remove his involvment from this site completely. Wikifur IS hurting someone here. Just because people don't agree with him doesn't mean it's okay.Redcard 16:20, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I'm willing to blank this page and lock it after relevant information has been transferred, but I would note that doing so would remove the positive information that shows the other side of the story, such as being a super-sponsor of AC. --GreenReaper(talk) 16:28, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I would suggest removing all information about Mix, and asking him not to come back. What we're seeing here is an End Run. He does not want information posted about him, and so people are moving the information off his personal page on to other pages. They are End Running around the point of blanking pages. This renders the entire policy irrelevant, as I can create an article that backhandedly references anyone who has a currently blanked page by request, or mention their negative involvement in other articles. It's CLEAR that the resolution to this is that Mix be completely blanked in all areas of Wikifur, asked not to return, and we all pretend like this never happened.Redcard 16:32, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
The problem with your suggestion is that our policy does not allow for people to be deleted from history like that. If people do something that impacts on something else and we report it as such, we won't remove that just because they don't want a personal article written about them. As it stands I feel my rewrite of the article gives a fair and balanced view and lists both the events that happened and the fact that their was no real malicious intent. As GreenReaper stated, removal and placing facts on other pages will result in the good things about the person being lost here. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 16:39, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
The the policy can be end run and will need to be addressed down the road since there is now no point to it. I can create a page on the activities of any user who has requested blanking and freely use them without violation of the policies or without it falling under the policies of Wikifur. Regardless, the man has asked for his page to be blanked. He has given ample time for that. Can his page be blanked and protected per the policies and rules of Wikifur? Redcard 16:48, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Its already addressed in our provisional policy here, mentions on other pages will not be removed if the information is relevant to the article concerned. We are also not quite ready yet to blank the page as we have not reached consensus and the information is not yet ready to be redistributed to other pages. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 16:57, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
The rules clearly state that the purpose of blanking is to remove the information in question. What is so bad about removing Mix's name from the facts in question and leaving it at "A suspected SA goon?" Why does this man's name have to remain in the game?Redcard 17:01, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
And by the way, administration here has blanked every page on request immediately without redistribution and end -running of information out to safe non-blankable pages. Why is there a delay here?Redcard 17:03, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Because we actually know who it is. We are not censored and do not have to hide facts that can be found out elsewhere quite easily. Likewise in all those cases, there was no contest and no one requested the pages remain. Thus consensus. In this case, there is debate and that must be resolved before we can continue. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 17:08, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I acted more rapidly in those cases than others both because I had more time to deal with them (I'm at work right now and can pay limited attention to this) and because I did not feel they would be contentious. I disagree with your view on "back running" as I think you are misrepresenting our current policy, which only applies to personal information, which is fairly strictly defined. See WikiFur:Personal_information#Mentions on other pages for the view on this.
But the site you point to is a proposal. The site Mix points to which states he should be allowed to blank his page is an actual policy in play. Redcard 17:22, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Right, and I've said this will happen. I don't see any reason for this to happen immediately, rather than in a few hours when people have had their say, and we've definitely decided what information should and should not be on this page, so that we don't blank text that should rightly be elsewhere and then can't be retrieved by users. --GreenReaper(talk) 17:44, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
The policy Mix points to doesn't cover the point of total site deletion, that's what the proposed policy will cover. Proposed policies also can still carry their weight unless objection to such points are raised. We have been loosely using the policy in regards to subject-controlled articles in one case as a trial. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 17:30, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
I simply don't think that the WikiFur community wants people to be able to say nothing happened about them and to have total exclusion on a sitewide basis. Specific personal information is one thing, but public actions that were known to be contentious at the time are quite another. If desired, I will try and create a formal vote on this soon, with various options for future actions. --GreenReaper(talk) 17:18, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Well, hey, its your wiki, not mine. I gave my suggestion, my reasons for it, and my opinion. If people continue, then the recent changes page will be the "All Mix, All The Time" page until someone stops. But, I mean, it's your wiki, not mine, so do what you wish. I'm out of this discussion and on to something else to occupy my time.Redcard 17:36, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Technically its 'our' wiki as in everyone's. It doesn't belong to GreenReaper, the admins or the users. It belongs to the furry community. ;) Don't worry though, this will be resolved, I think everyone really wants to hear what Mix thinks about all this discussion. --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 17:44, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)
Until consensus is reached, that's how things will be. I would actually suggest putting the top section of the page onto User:Mix, because it's stuff about the user and (I think) mostly written by them. --GreenReaper(talk) 17:54, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

If any of the furry-haters at Something Awful are aware of how much the endless debate over the AC 2005 incident seems to have brought all other activity on WikiFur nearly to a standstill, and is threatening to undermine some participants' faith in the site, they are probably laughing louder than any of us want to know. For all of the attempts by "SA goons" to troll, harass, and deface furry websites, wouldn't they be tickled to learn that one of the most successful results was one that we did to ourselves without their help.

Okay, sorry if I got a little to cynical just then, but I don't like where this is headed, and I wish everyone involved could just chill a bit and try to come to a resolution everyone can live with. --mwalimu 19:29, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC) P.S. I will be attending my sister's wedding and probably won't have internet access most of this weekend.

That's what we're doing, isn't it? :-) Debate is heated, to be sure, but once it's done, it's done. Besides that, it's an important matter that deserves the attention and thoughts of those involved in the project. Making decisions between the various options is a tricky task when there is no established policy, because people naturally have differing opinions. I've already had to make a few private decisions on this sort of topic, and they weren't easy to make either. However, what we decide here may be applicable to future cases - and I'm sure we'll have them, for as long as we include information about people.
I would note that we are lucky that this is one of the few cases in which we don't have precedent on what to do from Wikipedia. Most of the time we can just use their rules, but they don't have personal articles on "regular" people, and a lot of the stuff mentioned here (though perhaps not the AC 2005 events) would be removed from Wikipedia on verifiability gtounds. --GreenReaper(talk) 00:16, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

A Wiki Newbie's Opinion[edit]

To the extent that I'm allowed an opinion, I'd like to speak in favour of removing the actual 'Mix' page, which does in fact contain personal information, but leaving intact accounts of his public actions at the con.

My reasoning is that information about his religious leanings, generosity, sketchbook habits, etc., is actually personal information, and forms no real part of the history of the fandom. His actions at AC 2005 are part of the public record, though. They happened. People talked about them afterward, and I'm sure they coloured people's perceptions of the convention and the fandom itself. If you're going to allow removal of stuff like that because a participant has suddenly decided that he doesn't want the things he did to be remembered, then you're essentially giving individuals the power to go back and force changes in how certain aspects of history will be remembered and spoken of.

In the end I think it comes down to a question of what this wiki is supposed to be for. If it's just an entertainment for the participants, then I'd say go ahead and remove all mention of Mix and his actions since that's causing unhappiness. If, on the other hand, it's meant to be a knowledge base or historical resource, then I'd say remove his personal pages only (which state opinions and preferences - actual personal information), but let stand the references in other topics to his actions at AC, which are part of the public record. You can't really decide which to do without first deciding why we're here. I can't see arguments based on the stated policies of the wiki having much weight here, since the policymakers clearly didn't envision this type of situation.

Actually, I was pretty sure this sort of thing was going to come up when I founded WikiFur - I may be dumb, but I'm not that dumb. ;-) However, the wiki way is typically to decide what the opinion is through debate, then to codify that as policies when consensus has been reached about how best to go about things. I have therefore tended to defer things until they reach a point at which all options have been presented and a decision can be made. I did copy some of Wikipedia's guidelines that were clearly applicable (or required by our hosting), but not all of them.
As for purpose - WikiFur has always had a serious side. You can check out what we're about at WikiFur:What WikiFur is. --GreenReaper(talk) 00:09, 23 Sep 2005 (UTC)

(and BTW, how are people getting their UID and timestamp to automatically append to their posts? I'm not smart enough to figure that out). -Ostrich! <")

A quicky for you - { { UT|username } } for your ID and talk link - without the spaces between brackets of course! - ToyDragon(talk)
Actually easier than that, if you want that nice format that ToyDragon uses, go to your Preference page and place that code in the Nickname box, set 'Raw Signatures' on and then click Save. If you want just a default signature then leave that be.
To enter the sig and date automatically, click the signature button on the Editing toolbar or type ~~~~ which will make the site autoenter your signature and details for you. :) --Nidonocu - talk Nidonocu 20:12, 22 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Additional info[edit]

I don't know if this will ever make it into the article, but I just wanted to document it here that yet another person is complaining about Mix's antics:

I can also state that after causing several incidents at Anthrocon 2006, he spent the next few weeks sending me numerous nasty messages in IM, trying to bait me into conversation. I suppose I could post those logs if anyone is interested. --Douglas Muth 17:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I offended you, I was just frustrated that you chose not to answer my questions about your actions against me. You and other staff members treated me with much disrespect, singling me out, and rudely commenting that they didn't care about my mistreatment, my concerns, my requests, and to say that "We know how you are." as their only reason. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
Gee, what did you expect? You caused us problems two years in a row. This past year James Walton from the DI caught you in the Dealers Room after hours. I personally caught you in the Zoo with a fake axe. What did you think we were going to do, smile and nod? You cause us problems, you face the consequences, it's that simple. --Douglas Muth 21:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
You guys never gave me a fair chance to defend myself. A dealer, name kept private until request, asked me to help her to her table to set up at her request. Yes, a 'fake' axe. I bought it from 'your' convention. If you guys have such a problem with them, stop the sales of them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
Yep, James reported that too. He also reported that you were found nowhere near the dealer table in question. I believe his description was along the lines of, "roaming the aisles".
As for the axe, if you bought something like that from a dealer, you should have taken it to your room and packed it away. You were caught with it in the early morning hours in the Zoo, several hours after the Dealers' Room closed. --Douglas Muth 22:05, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
No one really warned me about it, unless you count that swarm of guards you ordered to demand me, if you would've approached me and just asked yourself, I would've be delighted to apollogize and listen to your request, but how you chose to go about it instead with intimidation wasn't a very polite way of asking. That was what I was trying to ask you on aim as to why didn't you take that approach. You really seemed like a jerk to do that to someone, instead of taking a simple approach. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
Um, you mean besides the blurb on our weapons policy which states in part:
"No weapons or any item that can be easily mistaken for one may be carried either openly or concealed at any time in convention space, regardless of any concealed carry permits you may possess. Padded swords, bokken and similar striking implements used to practice swordplay may not be used in any convention area. Weapon replicas may be worn as part of a costume only at the Masquerade and during convention-sponsored costuming events at the discretion of the Masquerade Director, and must be cased or otherwise secured when being transported to and from that event."
Seems pretty straightforward to me. It's published in the con book, and you had to agree to those terms in order to receive a conbadge. In the future, I suggest reading the rules for conventions that you attend. --Douglas Muth 01:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Noted then, though when I asked to read them at registration, your buddies summed it up for me instead "Don't be a dumbass.". Also, if you guys actually followed your own rules for once, I and another tried reporting "deliberate intimidation" and basic harrassment against me by two individuals, but it went ignored. Thus resulting in the headline of the pittsburg paper "Who gave Mix a ride?", which you did nothing to prevent even though I asked you guys to do to something, numerous times, but you guys did absolutely NOTHING. The reporter then sincerely apollogized, you guys never said a word.
Um, I mentioned that they were published in the conbook, right?
Yes, we got your complaint. We investigated it on our end and have taken the appropriate action. --Douglas Muth 02:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Again, I am sorry I did not understand the full definition of the statement, and I am sorry that I unknowingly violated it. I really thought it meant no (real) weapons. I've never heard of a 120-pounder carrying around a 3-foot REAL axe, that should wiegh half his weight. Get my point? I, and various others, carried it around during the con for photo-shoots and quick snap-shots of amazed people, and not one person came up to me with a request or concern to put it away, and if someone did, we would've all had listen to that request. Nor did anyone think it was real. So 'we' all thought it was ok. Again, I am sorry. I am very used to Anime conventions, where objects like this is allowed as part of one's character. I, myself, a gnoll warrior, thus the axe.
As for the complaint I filed, what action have you taken? I mean, this does involve me as a victim, I should have a right to know, privately of course.
As for Banrai, until she can provide proof of her allegations, I am negating all of it. Call it: Innocent until PROVEn guilty.
She is also accusing me of copyright infringement against her upon gounds of the infamous SA shirt that I made. Need I really prove this here? There is already a picture of me wearing the shirt on the SA wiki. Take it as another "Banrai File" case.
So if I take a unathorized picture of Kyoht's original art, and make an icon of it, does that make it mine as well?
Both her and I would be even-stevens and part ways she would've given back the shirt. Instead, in her entry above, she states: "If I still had that godforsaken shirt, I'd gladly give it back. The fact of the matter is that it was so ratty when it was given to me, my dog decided it would make a perfect bed and so it's not survived beyond a few measly shreds."
But in her counter-notification report to lj-abuse when I filed with the DMCA because of her unathourized use of my "burntfurrygoon" design as her icon: "I am the original creator of this icon, I can provide futher photographs of the object the icon was taken from if need be."
Rumours of me are getting very VERY over-exaggerated. It's very taxing on my life due to the humungous stress factor I have to face because people would rather beleive rumours about me, than the actual source, myself. Rumours about how I drove 10 hours out of my way to try and sabotage everyone's car in a few minutes, just to drive 10 hours back that same night, and I didn't even have a car. Seriously insane rumours... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
I am officially requesting that ALL information about me, including discussions, articles and sub-articles, as well as any mention of be to be removed from this website. I beleive that I am entitled to this by your agreement I agreed to. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
Well, that's up to the community. Personally, I find it disgusting that you act the way you do, then try to censor what others say about you. It smacks of hypocrisy and makes you look even worse. At least have the guts to accept the consequences of your actions. --Douglas Muth 21:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Disgusting? Tell me something, Giza. Did you ever chill with me and my friends? Spend some time, like an hour or more, with me first, then discuss my actions. Maybe you'd understand me better if you actually knew me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
Nope, I haven't. How about we just get straight the point and you tell me what possible justification you have for trying to suppress criticism about you. It's not as if it somehow takes away your ability to still say what you want.
As a general point, it's quite simple, really. All actions have consequences. If you want people to treat you better, you need to treat them better. That means: being considerate of others, stop antagonizing other people online, and stop trying to break rules at conventions. Maybe go do something for the community, too. I guarantee that if you start making positive contributions to the community, people will start treating you better. --Douglas Muth 22:05, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Giza, I am trying my hardest, and alot of people do say that I have improved greatly over the years. I am NOT trying to break your rules, it would be best if I knew my boundries with at least a warning, but furs don't seem to do that with me. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .
I do believe Mix is entitled to his request to privacy. He is not a public entity in the sense of the law, and should therefore be removed per your policy. It really doesn't matter what the community has to say on it-rules are rules, and enforcing this one only seems fair. --locket
Going around and harassing people, nay, even sexually harassing people and then wanting it to be hushed up is sort of silly. You can't be a criminal, a stalker, and an antagonist and then expect people to only say how lovely you are. Frankly, in the case of Mix harassing me, I have told him NOT to contact me and yet he's still sending me IMs and commenting my my LJ as an anonymous commenter. Come on, even you must admit that having a man call you at 4AM to tell you that he's lonely, and that he loves you, is a bit on the creepy side. Covering up this information will only lead to more and more people getting hurt in the same way, just as I and many others were. --Banrai
It's not a matter of what I want, it's a matter of the rules. If you have issues with Mix, that's your own business, and if you want to vent, LJ is the appropriate forum for such dialogue. I don't think that using an online encyclopedia as your soapbox against Mix is an appropriate use of it. A few furs have done heinous things to me aswell, but I haven't written about it on this website.--locket

It might be noted here that Mix has also recently sexually harassed an individual, purportedly one of this group of 'friends' that he hangs out with. However as it appears Mix is the only one that thinks these people are his friend. As a further annotation, Mix seems to be claiming that I have told people that the ratty shirt he gave me was created by me. This is not true. However, the photographs I took are copyright to me, as the photographer. As well, the usericon that was created, was created by me. Mix never asked permission to re-use my photograh, nor the usericon that I created. This is not the first time he has taken another user's icon and tried to claim it for his own. He's also quite well known for false generosity just to attempt to make others look bad, as well. More information on both cases can be found in the comments of each entry. It is very obvious here that, as past evidence shows, Mix simply can't break his habit of trying to make everyone else look bad, while playing the martyr. --Banrai

Banrai, I don't know you and you don't know me... However, I was at softball, I saw exactly what happened, and it seems both sides are blowing what happened out of proportion. The very link you posted describes the sexual harassment as, "Sema cries sexual harassment when Mix (un)intentionally brushes against her ass while both of them are waiting for food." If the witness did not believe this was an incident of sexual harassment, how can you?
And, if you don't mind a personal observation regarding the shirt... Mix has publicly stated that he made the shirt and it is his own artwork. He has pictures at various stages of the shirt's artisitc creation to back this up. And your taking a picture of his artistic creation does not make said artwork yours. --WoodyChiTwn
On the subject of copyrights, if Mix did create the art on the shirt, then yes, he would have legal copyright on it. However, taking a picture of said shirt and posting the picture MIGHT constitute "fair use" under copyright law. It's really hard to say as copyright law tends to be a bit vague on what constitutes fair use. --Douglas Muth 03:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
And this is not the first time Banrai has done something like this to someone, taking the credit, then bashing the real artist as a con and such:The Banrai Files ~Kæyleb
Again, Banrai is still bragging these lies to more people about him, even after he stopped talking about her, or to her. My only question to her is, where o' where is your proof of the artwork (seven sketches and a conbadge) you said you did for him? Also, I beleive you should, as well, [1] stop talking about him, delete your posts, and forget about this, hopefully to prevent future drama from ensuing if either of you accidentally push it too far and or one party snaps and goes to far. It seems as though he has done this favor for you and his keeping to his word of it, you owe him a favor such as this, as well. It seems you can't go a month without harrassing about on him, especially without evidence. ~Kæyleb

If this article is causing so much drama, how about you just delete the dammed thing? 14:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)