WikiFur - User contributions [en]

Talk:Evil Sibe

2006-04-25T18:12:34Z

200.237.79.194: /* Attention, Regarding link to Criminal record */

{{featured}}
worldpharmacy

== "Sold" pirated art? ==

I know that he's distributed and torrented various copyrighted works, such as Genus Male and a bunch of art sites such as "SexyFur," but where's the proof that he's actually ''sold'' the pirated artwork? I've never heard of that up until now.

Granted I hope this proof doesn't come from word-of-mouth. It seems that whenever Sibe is discussed, McCarthyism suddenly goes into full-effect and people try to one-up each other on what they've heard from the grapevine about $$DA EVIL HUSKEE$$. --[[User:Verix|Verix]]

:That's fair enough. I can't immediately see evidence for this in the sources, and none were marked as showng that, so I've changed it to "distributing" rather than "offering for sale". Thanks for helping make this article better! --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 02:55, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::Oh it's no problem. Is there any chance of also getting a commentary on the scapegoating that occurs due to his infamy? Such as if anyone attacks a channel anywhere, or if something happens to anything furry related, the immidiate response is "it was Sibe!"? Not trying to portray him in a better light, because hey, the record's there (at least at the bottom of the page under "criminal record"), but just trying to add more information as to what happens with this dude. --[[User:Verix|Verix]]

:::Sure, if you can provide some evidence of it . . . for example, if there are newsgroup or forum posts of it occurring. I've not seen it myself, so I don't know.

:::Of course, you should be make sure that it's not '''really''' Sibe behind it all. He can be tricksy, that husky. Like a fox, only grayer! ;-) --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 03:24, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::::Oh of course. I know of one specifically that happened on FurNet in a channel called #dragonyiff. A bunch of furries (and some Something Awful goons, I think) with the idea to just flood a channel came in, then stopped when the channel was set to "mute." After the flood stopped, one of the few responses was that it was Sibe's doing. That's just one example. I'm not quite sure if it's incredibly apparent, though, but I'll be sure to try and remember more situations that've happened. [[User:Verix|Verix]] 03:45, 15 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::::: I never sold pirated art. Thats a blatent lie.

:::::: Sibe bragged about his Art CDs a few years ago. He tried to tease, claiming he stole my Art to make money. I have no further proofs he truely did sell CDs. Maybe you could ask "Rabbit Valley", they certainly know the information. --[[User:Ozone Griffox|Ozone Griffox]] 16:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

== Hard Evidence ==

Since people were looking for factual information regarding Sibe, I have provided the admins of this site with the actual photocopy scans (in PDF form) of Sibe's criminal record and other related litigation records.

On a note for some of the more privacy minded people who have commented on this disccussion. This information is freely available through the [[Wikipedia:Freedom_of_Information_Act_(United_States)|Freedom of Information Act of 1966]] and through the Privacy Act of 1974. Posting said information in a public forum or other press type format, such as this site, as a part of the [[Sibe]] article to present real and hard evidence of this person in question, is an activity which is specifically protected by the Constitution's first amendment and these two acts. Contrary to what some people have mentioned above, the posting of such information can not be legally constituted as slander because the name "Sibe" is considered a criminal alias for the purposes of identifying Mr. Ross Reddick, and because all information pertaining to such activities within his criminal record is factual. Slander must include some element of falsehood which is designed to ruin a person. Facts and truth are not slander no matter how unflattering they are. Additionally, since this information is directly pertinent to the furry community, it would be unfair in the interests of truth and neutrality to withhold or censor it. The facts should be allowed to speak for themselves, if they paint the person in a bad light then it falls upon the person in question to rectify their own actions.

Finally, if you are interested in more information about Mr. Reddick, then I suggest contacting the FBI and requesting a copy of his FBI file (Yes, one exists and is rather lengthy); contacting one of the groups whom is in currently in litigation with him, like [[Rabbit Valley Press]] or [[FurNation Press]]; or contacting the state/county that said litigation is under teh jurisdiction of.

--[[User:Chronocoon|Chronocoon]] 03:59, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Huh? Slander? Who mentioned anything about slander? Or am I just being lazy and not seeing mentions of it in that huge chatlog above or in the discussion I had with Green? -- [[User:Verix|Verix]] 05:00, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Slander is an inference to what [[User:Offline|Offline]] was referring to with regards to the use of [[Sibe]]'s real name.

(Offline): Well, i'm not saying that the information is correct or not.
I'm actually not to sure myself. It's just the simple fact that
it carrys his real name. I would think it better if that were deleated.
the name "sibe" refers to a fictional character in my opinion. since
furrys tend to make up chartoon characters, and should not reflect
their real lives.
(Offline): Thats all i'm getting at.

* Slander ≠ Libel. Sillies.

For the purposes of this discussion, what the law has to say about the name "Sibe" is that it's not a fictional character but a criminal alias of a real person. The use of his real name might be considered slanderous or an invasion of privacy if not for the FOIA. -- [[User:Chronocoon|Chronocoon]] 06:25, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

:Ahh. Okay, I figured it was my ADD. Thanks for the clarification. -- [[User:Verix|Verix]] 05:21, 16 Aug 2005 (UTC)

Oh yeah, just an FYI after thought clarification on what I wrote as well: From the point of view of the law, there is a marked difference between an '''''Alias''''', and a '''''Fictional Name'''''. A fictional name is only used to refer to something which does not exist. However, a fictional name ceases being so when it is used to refer to a real person. This name association turns it into an alias, and aliases are '''not''' granted any legal right to privacy. The rationalle for placing aliases on public record and offering them no protection of privacy is to prevent the use of false or alternative names to commit acts of fraud. It is for this the very reason that a legal name change requires a court hearing in most states and one must swear under oath in front of a judge that the name change is not to defraud anyone or to commit future acts of fraud. If aliases were not covered like this, it would present an exploitable loop hole to commit fraud. Additionally, according to the law, the real world does not cease to exist just because someone's actions occur in some intangible virtual space such as IRC or Second Life. The person in the real world sitting behind the computer can be and often is held legally accountable for their actions, wether they be under a "fictional character name" or their real name. So, in closing, regardless of one's opinion on this, whether in agreement or not, it is important to understand that this precident is the one which is currently upheld within the United States judicial system. That's something to chew on and consider as a whole with regard to the whole 'name' rule for this site.

:I should point out that various furs do have valid, legitimate court orders of protection against Mr. Reddick. These furs do go to conventions, and the stipulations of several of their protection orders include "if Mr. Reddick is at the same location as the plaintiff, Mr. Reddick must leave."

: I should also point out (Sibe) that "various" furs do not have valid, legitimate anti-harassment orders against Mr. Reddick. The only one who does is Grey Fox Of Winter , AKA Loki Grey Coyote, aka Lonnie Wilson. That is the only "protection order" that has ever been served my person on a furrys behalf. The way Lonnie got this order was I emailed him, he responded with do not contact me anymore. Then I replied to that with "Why are you so mean?" He used that email discussion as grounds to get his anti-harassment order (less binding then a restraining order). The order will expire Feburary 2006. -Sibe

There's also an interesting interstate aspect of things: if a court order of protection is violated across or while across state lines, it carries 5+ years of jail time in a federal prison, minimum sentence.

Thus, if Mr. Reddick shows his face at a convention that I know one of these furs is at, I will be calling the FBI, and we'll be rid of him for a while.

: Winged

::Do you have links to scans of these court orders, or physical copies of them? --[[User:Dmuth|Dmuth]] 15:16, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC)

::: The order of protection that was gotten by myself against Ross Reddick was served by publication, and became effective on April 13th, 2005, for a period of one year. It was then personally served on Mr. Reddick on May 8th, 2005 by Officer K. Boyd of the Tukwila Police Department at Southcenter Mall in Washington State. It is actually expiring on April 13th, 2006. The service by publication was done due to his evasion of process service. The reason for service by publication is not to have him arrested from his lack of knowledge from the order, it is to keep the petitioner from having to go to court multiple times to get the temporary ex-parte order renewed over and over again due to the respondant's evasive conduct.

:::Per [http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=10.14.115 RCW 10.14.115], if he had contacted me or otherwise violated the order between April 13th and May 8th of 2005, he would not have been in violation of the order, unless he stated that he was an avid reader of legal notices in the King County Journal (which was the newspaper of legal notice record in the county). After that point, if he violated the terms, he is subject to arrest and contempt of court citation by the district court up here.

:::Anti-Harassment Orders are no less "binding" on the respondent than other forms of protection orders, it's just that violations of a Washington State anti-harassment order is a gross misdemeanor rather than a felony, as far as violations in the state of Washington goes. It could be felony level as far as other states depending on their laws of recognition of such orders from other states and how they translate into their matrix of orders of protection and punishments for violations of such, and federal law also has it's hand in it as well (going across state lines to violate orders of protection is a federal felony offense).

:::States have various different kinds of names for orders of protection, and different punishment levels for violations of such. Oregon's equivalent to Washington State's Anti-Harassment Orders are called "Stalking Protection Orders". The terms "Restraining Order" and "Order of Protection" should be assumed to be general terms encompassing the whole spectrum of such kinds of orders, because every state is different, and as was proven by Further Confusion, corporations can get orders of protection as well against individuals as well, at least in California. -[[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 19:00, 11 Feb 2006 (UTC)

== Revert of questionable content ==

I reverted out the following edit to the History section, 20 March 2002:
:''Having taken $500 from the account, Sibe went to downtown portland to blow the cash at a gay strip club called the Silverado. After blowing the money at the bar, getting drunk and buying drinks for everyone in the bar he drove to Camas, Washington with one of the strippers in the bar. At approximately 7a.m. he was arrested for the theft of the automobile (among other charges).''
It sounds questionable, it certainly isn't NPOV, and even if it's true, it strikes me as inflammatory and irrelevant detail, something I don't think WikiFur wants to get into. Fell free to discuss and decide if it should be restored.
--[[User:Mwalimu|mwalimu]] 17:23, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

:While I disagree in part with how the information was ''presented'', I do believe it is more than plausible given his other actions. If we're describing Sibe's character here, how he spent the money is relevant. I would feel uncomfortable about naming the dancer who went with him, but fortunately this did not come up. The terms of the writing were not NPOV - I have adjusted this. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 17:43, 5 Nov 2005 (UTC)

===Questionable links===
An Anonymous user has added information to the article under history and external links which leads to a site that, according to the "new" information in the article, contains a .torrent file which in itself allows a Bit Torrent user to download about 9GB of copyrighted material like that from Sexyfur among other sites. The same changes in the article suggest that Sibe had been banned from LJ because he refused to remove that link from his journal. If that much is true and the supporting evidence is correct, then it may be wise to remove the potentially illegal link(s) from the page to avoid any potential legal trouble. At this time, I have done so, though leaving the "written" email links in place. I would personally think that linking to a page that itself links to a potentially illegal pirated collection of pictures is an unsafe thing to do on this wiki. --[[User:Markus|Markus]] 12:42, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Edit: On second thought, after reading the emails themselves, I find them a little dubious. They hold the real names and email addresses as well as phone numbers of a certain person, and if they are real, the people in question probably wouldn't want to be flooded with calls from heaven only knows how many people. The links so far are found on the thepiratebay website and are called "rabbit_mail", "rabbit_resp", and "rabbit_mail2" respectively and in order. I find them dubious though and probably the entire tracker system of the site may reflect its name, I won't care either way. --[[User:Markus|Markus]] 12:42, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:I'm unsure about this myself. I don't doubt that the emails are valid - actually I think they show [[Rabbit Valley]] in a fairly good light, which probably wouldn't be the case if they were fake.

:I did like the reference to [[PafCon]]:
Hope to see you at the annually furry-convention in Las Vegas! Our whole staff
will be going as the cast from the movie "Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey"
:I don't think it's worth worrying about too much, though. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:19, 18 Dec 2005 (UTC)

== Exclusion ==

Please send a valid, verifiable, e-mail request to one of the Wikifurry administrators. The request for exclusion must be made by the person the entry appertains to. [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 18:10, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Please regard this as the official request for exclusion. [[User:Sibe|Sibe]]

:Please send a valid, verifiable, e-mail request to one of the Wikifurry administrators. The request for exclusion must be made by the person the entry appertains to. A written request on a Wikifurry page without proper verification is not a valid form of request. As your IP indicates prior vandalism of Wikifurry entries, we have no way to confirm that you are "Ross H. Reddick," (Sibe.) Please refer to the first suggestion for proper exclusion. [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 18:16, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

::"Negative /r/ removal" is not a valid address. [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 18:21, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:I've temporarily protected the entry until the exclusion request is verified as actually being from Sibe by an [[WikiFur:Administrators|administrator]]. Play by the rules, and we'll be happy to accomodate your request. [[User:CarlFox|Carl Fox]] 20:12, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
::I've been on the Wiki long enough and I consider myself to be friends with Greenreaper. I know I'm not an administrator, but I can verify that's Sibe. Trust me? :/ --{{User:Skunk/sig}} 20:51, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

::This is a removal request from Sibe. The question is, do we accept it?

::[[WikiFur:Personal information]] has always had an important cavaet - ''at the discretion of the WikiFur administration''. To be blunt, out of all articles on WikiFur, this is the one I was thinking of most when I wrote that.

::Many people feel strongly about Sibe. He appears to have done things that, frankly, pissed off a lot of people in the furry fandom, and he has (to my knowledge) shown little to no remorse for those actions. He does not respect the copyright of artists, to the extent that he has actually been tried and convicted for distributing their artwork. His article at WikiFur reflects that.

::Ultimately, the exclusion of articles about people at their request is done out of mutual respect. But is this enough for us to justify denying his request? Is it better for the fandom for it to stay? Should we be willing to remove some information but not other information? What are your thoughts? --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 20:53, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:::We ought to respect anyone's removal request, even if personally we don't agree with it. Although I hope with Sibe's approval that an article more acceptable to all could be written. For instance, speculation on which conventions one has been banned from isn't appropriate for anyone's article. --[[User:Rat|Rat]] 21:10, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

::::Unfortunately, personal information protection is something we have not faulted at yet, even for people like [[Random]] and [[Squee rat.]] So, as long if he request it '''personally''' (A "friends" request in his behalf is no a valid one,) with a real e-mail, that verifies it originated from him ("Ross Redick",) would have to be respected. In other words, he himself, and not hiding behind a "rent-a-email," avatar, or other type of obfuscating device, must ask the administrators in the open.

::::If removed, his "deeds" information can be incorporated into appropriate articles without mentioning this individual. Just my 2 cents. [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 21:13, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:::::He didn't ASK me to. I volunteered. I was talking to him on AIM. And if you keep adding on to these rules of what Sibe can and cannot do, then he'll have no way of sending an email to anyone. Just revert the damn page, it is him for crying out loud.

:::::And if you got a problem with me, just come out and say, okay? --{{User:Skunk/sig}} 21:22, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:::::Random's name was removed because it [[Talk:Random|had no particular relevance]] to the rest of the information presented in the article. Squee Rat has (as far as I know) left the fandom. Sibe remains within the fandom; whether his name is required is a valid topic of debate, and is one of the items of information that might reasonably be removed without removing the whole article. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:38, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

::::::"He didn't ASK me to. I volunteered....And if you got a problem with me, just come out and say, okay?." If you referring to "(A "friends" request in his behalf is no a valid one)," that was a generic phrase, not directed at you... As in ("A request from Ross' third cousin's PT teacher's gardener's son in law's nephew's drunk girlfriend in his behalf is no a valid one,")... >.< [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 21:48, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:::::::This isnt really a talk about exclusion, this is just a way that GreenReaper can lock the article, and make it seem like hes not being unfair. However, he really is. I hope I get to meet him in person someday, I would love to talk with him personally about my displeasure with his actions. -Sibe

::::::::This discussion is a method for deciding how we handle this sort of situation now and in the future. Someone has to be the test case, just as a certain person other was for the removal of names in "unrelated" articles where they were not central to the article. I won't just keep removing articles about noted people in the community without assurance that this is, in fact, the thing that the WikiFur community wishes. So far it seems I was right to worry, as there's no obvious consensus - some people think you should be excluded, and some do not, and there has not been much of an attempt at reconciling those positions by pinning down a middle ground.

::::::::I (or another administrator) will unlock the article '''when''' there is agreement on what is to be done. If anyone wishes to propose an alternate version that would be better, than they are free to make a subpage that contains a modified copy of the article. If they favour the removal of such protection from other pages as a result then perhaps examples of the pages that would be placed on these unexcluded pages would be appropriate as well. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 22:33, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:No new rules for Ross Reddick are being applied for exclusion. [[Random]] and [[Squeerat]] did it by the book (personal email, with their name on it, that could be verified or traced back.) He just need to do as much, that's all. [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 21:27, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)

::No new rules ''are'' being applied. I have '''always''' considered the appropriateness of any particular exclusion request (and I hope others have, too). In this case I am unsure of the consensus of the community, so I have opened this up for general discussion. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 21:34, 22 Dec 2005 (UTC)
:::Please just respect my request to remove the article.
-Sibe

:I should point out that several times I think the 'Sibe' article has been used as a bench mark for what's private and what's public. This discussion on [[Talk:Uncle Kage]] being one. People have to think where the line on public/private info has to be drawn on this wiki and this looks as though it may be where we have to decide. --[[User:Nidonocu|Nidonocu]] - [[User talk:Nidonocu|talk]] [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 05:13, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I am still undecided on this article. I think however that the second paragraph is in serious need of a rewrite in the interim. It is not apppropriate to speculate on what conventions he ''may'' have been banned from. Only the facts should be present in the article. --[[User:Dmuth|Dmuth]] 06:17, 23 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I feel strongly that this article does not qualify for exclusion. Just as a famous person or politician loses some rights to privacy in the general media by virtue of being famous, because the subject has affected many areas of furry fandom I think that the same applies. Moreover, I feel that the exclusion of "famous" members of the fandom would be highly detrimental to the goals of WikiFur. --[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 13:28, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

I second what Duncan said. Could be my own words. [[User:Somewolf|somewolf]] 15:08, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:By now, I don't even think it was even Sibe itself, at least asking "directly," to be removed. I still say "Aye." If we apply this standard because he is well "Know," I would vote revoke the protection on "SqueeRat," because, even though she is now old news, the person with that alias did cause a fair amount of commotion, akin to Sibe's actions today, during her time (Same goes for "Random,"...) In other words, why are we excluding these "famous" people's aliases, but we seem to want to throw the rules out for "Sibe"?. Just two cents more [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 18:42, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

::Honestly? I don't much agree with excluding Squee Rat or Random, either, for much the same reasons. Now, that is not to say that they don't have a right to privacy - no real names need be included. I think we need to draw a line where a person's actions affect others; '''THAT''' is the information we need to retain. This provides context for where furry fandom is today. Why is alt.fan.furry regarded by many with scorn? Why do some agree with Burned Furs, but not with their methodology? I think that having the participation of these people included in the tapestry of the fandom's history is an important key to answering those questions. --[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 18:52, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:::In other words, exclude ALL personal information, leave the Aliased person in. If that is possible (for ALL aliases,) then I would vote "Aye" on the matter. [[User:63.204.227.202|63.204.227.202]] 19:28, 27 Dec 2005 (UTC)

:I have trouble with excluding '''most''' people who have been exceedingly relevant or well-known among furries in their time, even if they did make personal requests. Reducing or removing some personal information is less of a dilemma for me. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]] 09:20, 1 Jan 2006 (UTC)

::I believe Sibe is working on a rewrite that does not have the personal information that concerns him. Once we see what he wishes the article to look like, we can perhaps go from there. I would like this issue to be sorted soon - it's been a while. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 19:09, 7 Jan 2006 (UTC)

:::''9/10 September 2005: "EvilSibe," with the opening paragraph "As of right now the Bellevue Police department is outside of my house serving a search warrent on my home, I cannot go anywhere and at any moment I could be arrested, announces the possibility of his possible imminent "arrest." In the post, he suggests that Rabco Publishing is behind this development, takes some jabs at Nexxus, and ends it by '''professing his love for his family''''', not. The last words in that post were "And now for some lulz:" followed by political satire --[[User:64.216.176.120|64.216.176.120]] 07:23, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

::::The paragraph tries to describe the "gist" of the post, not trying to quote it verbatim. [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 07:57, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

== Final Vote on the matter? ==

My two cents. The private information of Furs, Non-Furs, and/or Anti-Furs should be protected above all on this Wiki. If Ross Reddick (the real one), or any verified source, wishes such personal information to be taken out, we simply honor it,... '''but'''...

'''Aliases''' ("Fursonas," "Characters," etc) are another matter all together. Sibe, Random, SqueeRat... they have had the too much of an impact in the history of the fandom to be "sanitized" out. Suggestion? (IMHO only): Strip any personal information out, restore the information under these aliases back in their open entries (Even then, we should do the restoration with a "case by case" system.)

('''Notice''': This post '''does not''' represent the official view of [[WikiFur]] on this matter. This is a '''personal''' opinion piece.) [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 08:30, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

== Agreeing about personas ==

I'm going to have to add my input here.. We should be diligent about protecting furs who don't want their real-life information here, but at the same time, avatars and characters and such shouldn't receive as much protection, especially in situations where that avatar is "famous" in the fandom.

Since we are an encyclopedia, it is our duty to have articles on those who are "famous" within the fandom. Famous people in the fandom should be treated much like celebrities are in real-life; information about their characters and what they've done to become famous should be fair game on wikifur.

I do agree with removing Sibe's real name and location from his article if he wishes, though. Despite Sibe's antics, it's only fair to give him the same protection we give others. --[[User:Zorin|Zorin]] 16:33, 8 Jan 2006 (UTC)

:I would disagree in this specific case. In situations such as Squee Rat or Random or Stukafox where their real names and locations are pretty much irrelevent I'm OK with leaving that information out. In the unique case of Sibe, though, his real name and location are very much a matter of public record (and court records, copies of which are linked from this article), I do not think that there is much point in omitting them.--[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 13:26, 9 Jan 2006 (UTC)

::Multanomah County jail is not a private residence anyhow. ;p --[[User:Chibiabos|Chibiabos]] 18:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

== Restraining orders ==

I think date of that order is incorrect. It says 13 September 2005, but [http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.furry/browse_thread/thread/6fc21e1f63065875 this] suggests it was much closer to the convention. I'm altering it to 13 January 2006 instead.

I also find it odd that ''[[AAE]]'' managed to get an ex parte restraining order. My understanding of the law (and it is a very bad understanding) was you can only get those on a personal basis. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 07:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

:As I pointed out above in the restraining order section of the discussion page, every state has different laws and rules in regards to orders of protection. California is one of the states that allows corporations to get orders of protection. I believe Washington State does as well, but I'm not 100 percent sure on that. -[[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 19:00, 11 Feb 2006 (UTC)

== Past Criminal Activities, 2006 Arrest and aftermath ==

I did a one word correction on the page. He was "booked" by Multnomah County, not arrested by them. [http://www.portlandonline.com/police/?&c=29708 Portland Police Bureau] had jurisdiction over the place where he was arrested. I have changed things a bit to reflect that reality -[[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 19:17, 11 Feb 2006 (UTC)
:I was the one who originally wrote "arrested", and I acknowledge that you seem to have better information than I. Looks like a good edit to me.--[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 01:08, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I did a minor revision to reflect that it's not just piracy related lawsuits that he's being served with, but also orders of protection, as well as the correct year for his original conviction. It will also make clear that the arrest was due to his warrant, not due to a new crime, as well as the circumstances behind the warrant being issued in the first place. [[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 09:46, 12 Feb 2006 (UTC)

I am also clarifying the fact that the "DV-Coercion" notation in the booking log does not indicate that the police have arrested him for a new crime. It is only a placeholder due to his previous conviction. Though I'm certainly not a neutral party, nothing is served by wild rumors, speculation, and incorrect information. Though Sibe may engage in that sort of behavior, I will not and will do my best to correct mistakes and bring more verifiable facts to light. [[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 09:46, 12 Feb 2006 (UTC)

:Thank you very much for your edits to this article. I agree wholeheartedly that misinformation is worse than no information at all. The more accuracy we have here, the better!--[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 01:08, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Sibe's Greatest Journal was deleted overnight, and a new entry into the controversy section was entered under 14 February 2006. He did not delete it himself, due to him being in county custody.[[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 20:17 14 Feb 2006 (UTC)

:I'm curious about the mention of Sibe being process-served while in custody. Although I've seen calls for people to do this, do we have any proof that this was actually done? --[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 20:52, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

::Email statements made by Mike Curtis of Shanda Fantasy Arts, Summer Jackson who is the attorney for AAE, and phone statement by Rabbit Valley to me. Unfortunately until I can get the "Return of Service" paperwork from them, I will have to trust them at their word. Summer Jackson is an attorney and bound by ethics code in California, and the other two have active lawsuits against him, and nothing is served by them lying about their own lawsuit. He also has to be served with a renewal of my own order. [[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 01:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

:::OK, no problems. I confess I asked mainly out of idle curiosity, and I'm sorry if it came across as "put up or shut up" because I assure you that was not my intention. As we do strive to be semi-encyclopedic, it's always better if we have some online statement (forums, Usenet, etc.) that we can point to for reference, but some things, like the American legal system, just aren't geared for such things yet (booking files of Multnomah County notwithstanding :-) --[[User:DuncanDaHusky|Duncan da Husky]] 13:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I am in the process of doing some massive editing of the controversy section, adding a bunch of dates, specifically, his criminal activities, when warrants were issued for his arrest in various different jurisdictions, such as Oregon, Washington, and Massachusetts, as well more details on his juvenile criminal record, which is public information in Washington State. In Washington, unless you go through a process of petitioning the court to expunge and remove the records from the court file, the juvenile records are still applicable as convictions. A lot of folk think that as soon as you turn 18 years of age, the records go away, which hasn't been the truth for almost 20 years in most US States. All information about his arrest and convictions are from public record, and these are available by request. His moves between Portland and Bellevue and back are from his appearances at furry meets in Seattle and Portland areas as a resident of those areas. [[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 00:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

:Should some things be separated out of the controversies section? That section is getting a little cluttered, plus, the concept "Sibe goes to jail for x, x, x" is fact. The controversies would be something someone could easily disagree with or question, i.e. things like Sibe getting banned from cons, where there are some who believe this was unfair. The "fact" stuff could nicely stay listed, but I also wonder if "controversies" would look better written up. I'm thinking more of the aesthetics than a lack of neutrality. Normally I'd just go ahead and do this myself, but I like to avoid drama, and drama seems to gravitate towards the mere mention of Sibe. ;) [[User:IzzyFerret|IzzyFerret]] 03:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

::I agree, it is getting a little long there, and the title doesn't correctly describe the section - the actions ''have'' raised controversy, but they are not generally in question. --{{UT|GreenReaper}} 05:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

:::Changing the name may be a good idea.-- [[User:Gray Coyote|Gray Coyote]] 13:20, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
::::I've given the controversy section a new name for the moment in order to see if it works better than the last one in describing the listed activities. ----[[User:Markus|Markus]]([[User talk:Markus|talk]]) 22:04, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

== Prison ==

Would somebody please provide sources for the news that Sibe is going to prison, as well as the "various lawsuits and orders of protection" and the "multiple federal counts"? --[[User:Kitch|Kitch]] 03:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

:Sibe is currently in Multnomah County jail. As for the federal stuff, I don't know the full details. I will most likely be rewriting the 7 March with verifiable facts rather than suppositions on the anon editor's part --[[User:Gray Coyote|GrayCoyote]] 10:19, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

::I am afraid I must confess to having made that edit. I knew you would be incommunicado for awhile and thought I'd post something at least until you could get back and post more direct information. I was doing my best trying to remember what you'd told me. My sincerest apologies. --[[User:Chibiabos|Chibiabos]] 06:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

:::No big deal. Kitch, if you look through the rest of the discussion above, you'll see that I am one of the folks who had him processed served for an order of protection, along with Further Confusion's parent corporation. The lawsuits are from Shanda Fantasy Arts, Rabbit Valley, and Monitor Studios (parent corporation of SexyFur.com) that I have been able to confirm. -[[User:Gray Coyote|GrayCoyote]] 08:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC).

Edits have been done after a few weeks of delay (due to having to deal with a family emergency). The previous massive edit by an IP address was done by me, due to me forgetting to log into WikiFur (DOH!). The only change made was the removal of a word and removal of the "federal stuff", which is supposition. The sourcing of the 17 February 2006, 7 March 2006, 5 December 2002, and 3 May 2002 comes from audio of the hearings, which will be made available to anyone who asks. The 23 March 2006 entry was from concerns that he was released early, however both VINELink and phone calls to Multnomah County Jail indicate his continued incarceration. Also made a slight mistake in date formatting that I have edited to correct for the 3 May 2002 entry -[[User:Gray Coyote|GrayCoyote]] 08:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC).

== Controversy section ==

I think the "Controversy" label on his legal activity record is becoming a bit dated. I agree with previous comments this chronology is not really controversial; to my knowledge, no one has contested it (rather hard to, as much of it is a matter of legal public record). Perhaps it should be renamed "Legal Timeline" or something similar. "Controversy" should only be used to describe disputable information; you cannot get much more indisputable in the U.S. than a public criminal record. --[[User:Chibiabos|Chibiabos]] 18:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

:And I also agree that if it's not controversial, it shouldn't be called controversy. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]]([[User talk:Siege|talk]]) 06:21, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Talk:Evil Sibe

2006-04-22T07:07:42Z

200.237.79.194: /* Attention, Regarding link to Criminal record */