Talk:Rohkor Fenix

Exclusion request
The subject of this article has requested personal exclusion. If you wish to object to this request, please do so within 24 hours. --EarthFurst (talk) 13:31, 9 February 2018 (EST)
 * Yeah, I'm going to object. I think the subject's actions in his place of employment crossed the line from stupidity over into criminality, and people deserve to be warned.--Higgs Raccoon (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2018 (EST)
 * I'm a little late, so I imagine it won't mean anything, but I'd also like to object this per the same reasoning as Higgs above. --V. CA (talk) 11:46, 11 February 2018 (EST)

The subject of this article has again requested personal exclusion. Just noticed that RokorFenix on FA sent me a FA SendNote (sent a few days ago) re exclusion of this article "... I saw that it wasn't taken down due to being shot down. I was wondering if I could please get it take down now. I've paid my dues and wish for my privacy back I beg of you. Thanks for reading." --EarthFurst (talk) 00:40, 21 March 2019 (EDT)
 * Any derivation from our norms should be justified by prevention, not a desire to see punishment. The subject likely lost his job over this, after Subway was made aware. I'm not sure they'd have reported him to the police over it, but it could be seen as a modicum of justice. The article itself is a reasonable warning for our community; the issue for me is that the linked content is, arguably, an ongoing violation of privacy (and for the selfie photos, copyright). Taking it down at source under Twitter's copyright policy might be a better approach, but there is a strong fair use argument and the request might not be accepted. Either way, the question for us remains: should we continue linking to a continued violation of privacy and copyright in order to substantiate claims based in the article - which are not, as far as I can see, under dispute, but also are unrelated to furry beyond being done by a furry? Or is it necessary for furry fans to know what this person looks like - not just his fursuit, but his face and tattoos - in case he (for example) starts using another name and volunteers for con suite? --GreenReaper(talk) 05:44, 21 March 2019 (EDT)
 * FWIW, Google searching "Rohkor Fenix" reveals their face and the associated Twitter thread in the inline set of images, which given that people probably stumble on the article by Google searching, means that a removal here just takes another couple links down the search listing to find the thread. I'm not one to promote harassment, so I could reasonably understand not having one's face and whatnot connected in such a manor, but at the same time I question whether or not removing the reference here really helps all that much. At least, if the tweet was removed, it could be argued that the link being removed here would make it harder to find on archive.org and other archives. But, as long as the history stays, I suppose I am indifferent to the ref in this particular case. --FrostTheFox (talk) 16:40, 21 March 2019 (EDT)