Talk:Tumbles the Stairdragon/Archive1
There is a reference in a forum thread to "joking about the meme in 2's latest show". I assume that would be a Februrary 2007 show. A confirmation and specific reference would be a good addition; not something I'm volunteering to track down myself as I don't find 2's show funny. -- Sine 03:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- That's impossible, since 2's rant was at 7:30PM Saturday night according to my conbook, and Tumbles took his dive early Sunday morning. 2 may have said something on his own about it, but it wasn't in his show. Spaz Kitty 23:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I take exception to this article. The incident itself, while cruelly amusing, has neither significance nor historical importance. Its posting is nothing more than a leering attempt to make fun of an emotionally disturbed individual.
I do not believe that Wikifur (or any Wiki for that matter) should be used to pillory an individual merely for the amusement of others, under the guise of recording "history." It is bad enough that this person must suffer ridicule for making a mistake. To record that mistake in what amounts to an encyclopedia serves no purpose other than to rob that person of the opportunity to learn from the mistake, to put it behind him, and to move on.
We all do dumb things. When we do, we bear the smirks and the finger-pointing, and wait for it all to blow over -- unless, of course, someone decides to put it in a Wiki, in which case it will never blow over. It becomes a lifelong sentence for a trivial affront. That is not the purpose of the Wiki project. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by UncleKage (talk • contribs) .
- So, with what your implying, any other person that might have made a mistake in the past, like Sibe or Mix, shouldn't have any of the bad things they did listed on the article even if they do turn around their ways and become the model citizen? This I do not agree with, simply because it was obviously notable enough to write about, and that's why it exists here. It was a major event that had an entire convention shut down for a period of time (I think they actually closed for the night after this happened, I honestly don't remember because I wasn't hanging around gawking). That, in itself, gives it's mention merit. Then again, what do I know. --Banrai | talk (06/07/07) 23.17 (UTC)
- We do not generally take preemptive action in this kind of situation. If a person has a problem with our treatment of them, we suggest that they mention it, publicly or privately, and then it can be dealt with. Given the private nature of many individuals covered, we will usually do quite a reasonable amount to protect a person's identity upon their request. But they have to request it, otherwise we don't know they personally have a problem with it.
- (The exception to the above is where we collectively feel doing so would not be "right" - meaning "in the best interests of the fandom". In that case, we might only do part of what they want - possibly a very small part. Such situations are not treated lightly. I usually end up arguing for the person, but I don't always succeed.)
- Others can certainly suggest that we exclude information, but there is a higher barrier to doing so; they have to convince WikiFur editors that it's a good idea, without the automatic argument that it is hurting the feelings of the person concerned. We will accept a person's word on that, but others cannot speak for them.
- As far as I am aware, the person concerned has never edited WikiFur, nor have they contacted any of our administrators about this page. If they did make such a request, there are several things we might do; the most obvious one to me would be to move this article to the name Tumbles the Stairdragon (currently a redirect here), and remove mention of the person's fan name from the article. We have had had at least one previous situation where something similar was done. In that case, too, it was the incident rather than the person concerned which people considered particularly notable.
- I respectfully disagree with your assertion that people are prevented from moving on by truthful, accurate recording of their past actions. This argument has been made by several people trying to remove information from WikiFur, but it misses two big points: we do not control how they choose to live their lives, and we never fully close the book. Wikis are infinitely rewritable - and if the situation changes, then we can edit the articles as appropriate. When there are silly things; well, silly things fade, and future editors may become less interested in a full treatment, or it may be crowded out by further information. When there are "bad" things, we will be glad to record if they have made amends and if the community has "forgiven" them. But, just like the fandom itself, we do not wholly "forget". I think doing so would be wrong.
- Moreover, I believe this is part of what we should be doing. We record history - and history has always been what people think was worth recording, the good and the bad. In a fandom, sometimes that history involves people who would not normally be public figures, and situations which would hardly make the News at 10. We do have some consideration and tact - which is why this wasn't a story on WikiFur News. But if people want to know the origin of the term "Tumbles the Stairdragon", then WikiFur is where we hope they will come, and where they should expect to find that information. There are certainly far worse places they could go - and the more we exclude, the more we encourage others to use those places for accurate information. --GreenReaper(talk) 23:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Just a little response from the peanut gallery - I was there, it was something that was talked about all day after it happened, and because it was so notable an "event" at a popular convention, it needs to be noted. One thing I appreciate about WikiFur is that it doesn't gloss over the negatively-percieved parts of furry fandom (zoophilia, plushophilia, and all those other things anti-furs tend to joke about); it's up front about it, and tries to give a neutral explanation about it. Sort of a: "Yeah, it's something furries are known for, so we won't pretend it doesn't happen, and we'll try to factually document it." Chyra's pretty well known as Tumbles the Stairdragon; I think removing all references to it might be seen as an attempt from the furry fandom to try and cover up the less-than-positive things about the culture. As for making "trivial mistakes"? Honestly, if he had attempted suicide in the privacy of his own home, I wouldn't think it appropriate to list here, because that's his business and we're not a tabloid. But he forced this into a public issue when he pulled this at a 700+ person convention. Just my two cents. Spaz Kitty 00:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- More from the peanut gallery. I think it would be a right idea to remove Chyra's name from this and just rename the article after Tumbles. After all, everyone knows Tumbles, but we don't generally know his name. It's a wellknown chapter of the furry fandom. The notoriety will fade in time, but there will always be someone saying hey, remember that FWA the Tumbles guy? For privacy sake, we could remove the Chyra reference and then if someone looks up Tumbles, there'd be no connection between them and we would still have recorded the history of the furry fandom with a clean and clear conscience. --Kendricks Redtail 05:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I would have no problem with renaming this article to "Tumbles the Stairdragon" and removing Chyra's name either. Unless he starts doing this on a regular basis at cons, it seems like an isolated incident. --Douglas Muth 03:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't really have a problem with doing it - more that we're doing it "to save him from himself", so to speak, rather than at his request. But, if people here really think it's the right thing to do, I guess we can. I'm just concerned about the precedent it seems to set for people to come across something they don't like on an article about someone and demand that it be removed for that person's privacy - even though they've never been a contributor to the project and don't have authority to speak for the person concerned. --GreenReaper(talk) 14:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I was at FWA 2007 when this occurred, and heard the nickname "Tumbles" being used only hours after the incident occurred (I'd give a more specific timeframe, but being woken up by roommates who were also angry staffers about having to stay up all night serving as security because of said Stairdragon made it a little difficult for me to remember the exact time XD). I'm not sure how soon this information was leaked to the intarwebs after it occurred, but I doubt it managed to get to LOLFurries and /back/ to the con for regular, casual use in a mere matter of hours. Either way, tracing back and pinpointing who coined the term first would be like trying to figure out who coined the term "yiff" - it was in widespread use before anyone could really figure out where it came from first. But I think it's safe to say that since the reference used that links to the LOLFurries forum has a first usage of the name "Tumbles" on February 23rd, 5 days after FWA ended, they didn't come up with it first. They can't even agree amongst themselves who purportedly came up with it first, which is why they said LOLFurries created it as a joint effort. Either way, I think a blanket coverall of "the furry fandom" will serve the purpose needed here. Spaz Kitty 15:58, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- I thought Foxen coined the word yiff.
- I hosted the room party he abruptly left, was by the stairs when he threw himself down and was around the crowd that, shortly after, drew the conclusion that he was a "dragon." I credit Mik Genocide for the name, but I honestly don't care enough to wiki-war over it. --Icono 16:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Call for Delete
This page contains a number of inaccuracies to the event and tends to be more of an advertisement for LOLFurries than not. An example is "You're Doing It Wrong" being yelled at the person before he jumped. The witnesses on the scene (of whom myself and the police talked to) did not report the person being antagonized, talked to, or otherwise approached by anyone. In contrast, the person seemed frustrated, upset, talking to himself, and angry. Because of this and many other errors and almost what seems like a "proud" tone , I vote for deletion. This is different from Sibe, as the information from Sibe at least attempts to be correct. Redcard 21:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Inaccuracy and tone are both problems that can be fixed. Why not just make such edits yourself? --GreenReaper(talk) 00:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'll make the edits, but I'm thinking this has already been done before and my edits have been moved out. That's why I think it'd be better just to delete this article. Many of the people cited weren't even PRESENT at FWA. Redcard 13:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
- Leave for posterity. For one thing, his tumble in 2007 sort of illustrates the importance of controlling one's consumption of alcohol and other drugs at large social events. It's different at smaller gatherings where people know you and know how to handle you begin being a douche, but it's more crass than usual at a big con. Also, the next time he went, I think he made a positive example of himself by choosing to man up and go to try to make amends, and I think Tumbles deserves some credit for not just sticking his head in the sand. Oh, and I thought that being moody and eccentric was part of what gave dragons their immense sex appeal, but I'm known for saying weird things. --220.127.116.11 21:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Removing The Tag
After I add a couple things, I'm removing the tag. Factual accuracy is about as high as it's going to get unless "Tumbles" edits it himself. No need for the tag. I was there, he started out the first day of the con in my room and I've talking to him many times since the event. Trust me, if there was something egrigiously inaccurate (besides the LOLFurries party, which I left him to go to the rave during), I'd have fixed it. AnonIhmus 19:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)