<div style="padding: .25em .75em .05em .1em;margin: -.05em -.05em -.05em -.05em; border: 1px solid #ffc9c9;color: #000;background-color: #fff3f3">
<div style="padding: .2em .4em .2em .2em; margin: .15em -.15em 0em .15em; background:#ffe3e3;font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-weight:bold;font-size:120%;border:1px solid #bfa3a3;text-align:left"><div class="plainlinks" style="float:right;margin-left:0px;margin-right:0px">''[{{fullurl:Template:Upcoming events|action=edit}} edit]''</div> Upcoming events</div><div style="font-size:85%;">
{| width=100% style="background-color:#fff3f3" summary="Upcoming furry events" |
|valign="top"|

'''2008:'''
<br>[[Image:GBR.png|UK]] Nov 27-30: [[RBW]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Dec 01–05: [[Furry Cruise]] (FL)
<br>[[Image:AUS.gif|AUS]] Dec 12-15: [[MiDFur]]
<br>[[Image:RSA.gif|RSA]] Dec 12-16: [[South Furrica meet]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Dec 30-Jan 01: [[New Year's Furry Ball]] (PA)
<br>[[Image:NED.gif|Netherlands]] Dec 31-Jan 01: [[MewYear]]
<br>
<br>'''2009:'''
<br>[[Image:FRA.gif|France]] Jan 04-08: [[Fhursky]]
<br>[[Image:ARG.gif|Argentina]] Jan 16-18: [[UFACamp]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Jan 22-26: [[Further Confusion]] (CA)
<br>[[Image:RUS.gif|Russia]] Jan 28-Feb 01: [[Rusfurrence]]
<br>[[Image:CAN.gif|Canada]] Feb 14-16: [[Furthest North|Furthest North Winter]] (AB)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Feb 20-22: [[Furry Fiesta]] (TX)
<br>[[Image:BRA.gif|Brazil]] Feb 21-24: [[Abando]] (SP)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Mar 19-22: [[Furry Weekend Atlanta]] (GA)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Apr 3-5: 2009: [[I-CON]] (NY)
<br>[[image:USA.gif|USA]] Apr 23-27: [[Wild Nights]] (MO)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Apr 24-26: [[Furry Connection North]] (MI)
<br>[[Image:GER.gif|GER]] Apr 30-May 3: [[Mephit Mini Con]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] May 15-17: [[All Fur Fun]] (WA)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] May 15-17: [[Morphicon]] (OH)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] May 22-24: [[Rocket City FurMeet]] (AL)
<br>[[Image:GBR.png|UK]] May 22-25: [[ConFuzzled]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] May 29-31: [[Elliott's Spring Gathering]] (FL)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Jun 5-7: [[Califur]] (CA)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] June 12-14: 2009: [[Duckon|DucKon]] (IL)
<br>[[Image:GER.gif|Germany]] Jun 18-21: [[BerliCon]]
|valign="top"|
'''2009 (cont):'''
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Jul 2-5: [[Anthrocon]] (PA)
<br>[[Image:POL.gif|Poland]] Jul 9-12: [[Futrzakon]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Jul 24-26: [[Megaplex]] (FL)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Aug 14-16: [[Elliott's Summer Celebration]] (FL)
<br>[[Image:GER.gif|Germany]] Aug 26-30: [[Eurofurence]]
<br>[[Image:CAN.gif|Canada]] Aug 29-Sep 2: [[Feral!|Camp Feral!]] (ON)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Sep 4-6: [[Mephit Furmeet]] (TN)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Sep 18-20: [[RainFurrest]] (WA)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Oct 16-18: [[FurFright]] (CT)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Oct 22-26: [[Oklacon]] (OK)
<br>[[Image:GER.gif|Germany]] Oct 29-Nov 1: [[HerbstCon|Die HerbstCon]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Nov 20-22: [[Midwest FurFest]] (IL)
<br>
<br>'''2009 TBA:'''
<br>[[Image:SUI.gif|Switzerland]] 2009: [[CH-on]]
<br>[[Image:GER.gif|Germany]] Mar 2009: [[HerbstCon|Die HerbstCon Spring Edition]]
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] May 2009: [[Rocky Mountain Fur Con]] (CO)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] June 2009: [[Gathering of the Gargoyles]] (IL)
<br>[[Image:AUS.gif|Australia]] July 2009 [[RivFur]] (BNE)
<br>[[Image:CAN.gif|Canada]] Aug 2009?: [[BC FurBQ]] (BC)
<br>[[Image:AUS.gif|Australia]] Sept 2009?: [[FurJAM]] (SYD)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Oct 2009?: [[Elliott's Fall Festival]] (FL)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Oct/Nov 2009?: [[Furloween]] (FL)
<br>[[Image:CAN.gif|Canada]] Oct/Nov 2009?: [[Howloween]] (BC)
<br>[[Image:USA.gif|USA]] Nov 2009: [[Midwest FurFest]] (IL)
<br>[[Image:MEX.jpg|MEX]] Nov 2009: [[ConFurtiva]]
<br>[[Image:NZL.gif|New Zealand]] Nov 2009: [[FurcoNZ]]
|}
<div class="plainlinks" style="text-align: center; margin-top:-.5em">[[List of conventions by attendance|Conventions by attendance]] - [[List of furry convention resources|Con resources]] - [[:Category:Convention photographs|Con photos]] - [[Template:Timeline of conventions|Timeline]] - [http://greenreaper.co.uk/wikifur/ConventionMap.html Map]</div>
</div></div>
<div style="clear:both"></div>
<noinclude>[[Category:WikiFur templates|{{PAGENAME}}]]

[[cs:Template:Nadcházející akce]]
[[de:Vorlage:Termine]]
[[fr:Template:Évènements prochains]]
[[pt:Predefinição:Próximos eventos]]
</noinclude>

Talk:Mozdoc

2008-06-26T18:23:22Z

VWhitepaw: /* Removal of real name? */

<div style="float:right; border:2px solid #bbbbbb; width:150px;">
<center>'''Discussion Pages'''</center>
*[[/Archive1|Archive 1]] (May 2007 - June 2008)
</div>
'''Older conversations have been archived. Please view the links on the right review old threads.'''

== Removal of real name? ==

Exclusion is out. It's fairly clear that this sort of pattern over an extended period of time is notable enough to be recorded. However, I for one would like to see this series of events peter out rather than continue. It's been five years and I suspect both parties are kinda sick of it. I've read over the above, and it seems like a fairly meaningless feud at this point.

With this in mind, I propose that we keep this article (with all appropriate modifications based on the above) but remove Mozdoc's real-life name from it, '''''on the condition''''' that there be nothing that requires the real name to be used in the public interest going forwards. For the avoidance of doubt, "nothing that requires its use" would include things like the need to renew a non-contact order because unwanted contact and/or threats have continued, either offline or online. If there is further need to remove Mozdoc from conventions then this would also be cause for re-addition of the name.

The only thing that makes me willing to suggest this is that so far I've seen no evidence that he actually has the capability to make his threats a reality. To my knowledge, he has not been charged with a violent crime. There is a lot of posturing and a lot of bitterness there, and I would like to have a way to prevent those being expressed in the future. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 09:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

: i really have no opinion on this one. after all, his name is on the restraining order, and on many of the pages which are referenced. so removal would be a pointless gesture.
: it would definitely be nice to forget all of this. as i said before, i hold him no ill will. i am not capable of holding grudges. i never learned how. i will continue to document however. as it is history and others may learn from it to prevent from it being repeated.
: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 10:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

: Speaking purely from a personal perspective, I would urge you to keep Mozdoc's real-life name in this particular page. After following many of the links provided to past and more recent behaviour, they show that Mozdoc has sent death threats to numerous different people. History has proven that such things should never be taken lightly. Having Mozdoc's real-life name on the page would be a useful time-saver for such victims if they wished to go down any legal avenues. --[[User:Findra|Findra]] 17:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

: While it may be true, has it been shown that he's doing any of these recently? Frankly, the arguement that it is a time saver is null and void. In order to persue legal measures, one must feel that his threats would hold merit, meaning that they know who he is and that he has the ability to carry them out, so would be able to legitimately file a claim. Having the name here simply opens a route for harassment, be it due or undue, and is just fueling the fire. If he hasn't done anything in a while, which he hasn't, and if he continues to remain passive, I see no reason to keep the name here. Also, as you've said, if need be they can review the links if they so choose to dig deeper, as they are a matter of public record. The point remains that it is not necessary in the article. --Michichael 00:38, 12 May 2007

:: well, if you get technical, the moment he threatens another, and they have an actual fear, then by law his threats have merit. the law does not look at if they actually carried it out in that case. they look at intent. if a person is in legitimate fear, they have a right for the object of that fear to be stopped.
:: and, ummm. at the risk of sounding a bit repetitive. but he still harasses me at least twice a week minimum. he knows i can not just shut down my avenues of contact due to customer service issues. he also harasses me and my wife at conventions. and his threats remain constant against myself and others.
:: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 19:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

::: Well, you still don't discount my point. This site is for information, not to play tit for tat on a feud between the parties. The real name is not NECESSARY to the merit of the article as it pertains to the fandom. A argument that it aids in legal action is irrelevant as past actions are part of public record, cited, and available on your own wiki. This really seems far too petty for a wiki. -- Michichael 14:18, 14 May 2007 {{unsigned|Michichael}}

:::: please do me th courtesy of not thinking i have anything against him. because i do not have anything for him other than a very unhealthy dose of pity. for some reason i can not feel anything but such for him. and please do not accuse me of using this as a place to get back at him, because there is nothing to get back for.
:::: i am constantly asked by people he threatens about him and what they can/should do. wiki is an information source and people come here for said information regarding jeremy. not for information about me. they deserve to have the same information to find out about him without the legal costs associated with it that i had to go through. because i did not go through it for myself. i did it so the community would have access to information with which to protect themselves from future instances.
:::: and, as a note: [http://furry.wikia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Mozdoc&action=history here] should be more than sufficient to explain his recent behavior.
:::: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 21:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

::::: You still have yet to discount my point. If it is legal action they require, they can get it by contacting you directly, or by viewing the cited material. The direct posting of his name isn't necessary to the article, and has already been shown to cause anxiety to Mozdoc, which comes off as baiting, which has been pointed out elsewhere in this article. This is a private issue between you and Mozdoc, and it really does seem that you have something personal against him. Granted, I'm not defending his actions. I've told him numerous times that he needs to grow up with some of his comments, and would be happy to be a moderator if you two decided to attempt a discussion online. It seems to be that Mozdoc is trying to get back at you for perceived injustices, such as what's posted on this Wiki with his name, and you are continuing to try to goad him.

::::: It is all well and good to document and keep track for legal purposes, which are cited and referenced within the article, however, the inclusion of his RL name within the article seems irrelevant and really comes off as a personal touch of arrogance and "so there" attitude. I fail to see how the rest of the community cares what his real life name is, and if they do feel threatened by him, how having it here helps, over a freely available source elsewhere, through either you or the referenced sources. It's not necessary to the article, and your link to the talk page looks to me like, cleaning up his language, a request to remove it. So obviously you hit a nerve, and are milking it for what it's worth. This is a childish dispute, and really needs to end. Both of you. I'm not going to place blame on either side. I really could care less, but since seeing it, it does come off as an attempt to goad him. Further, I understand his concern about having his real name out there. I personally don't like having my real name available to people either, specifically due to harassment reasons. - Michichael 21:03 PST 15, May 2007 {{unsigned|Michichael}}

::::::Mozdoc has threatened to [http://furry.wikia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Mozdoc&diff=next&oldid=138555 kill Ayukawataur] at Further Confusion next year. Not only would I advise someone letting the FC staff know about these repeated threats (and Ayukawa as well), I once again reemphasize my opposition to removing his name. If he ever followed through on any of his threats, would you still support having his name excluded from the article? Because I'm not willing to take such a gamble in what seems to be a mentally less than stable person. [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] 17:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

::::::I agree with Spaz Kitty that Mozdoc's real name should remain, for the reasons stated above.----[[User:DuncanDaHusky|DuncanDaHusky]]<sup>([[User talk:DuncanDaHusky|talk]])</sup> 18:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

::::::: I agree that Moz is truly a "Special Child", but we shouldn't allow a doublestandard to be created, see: [[Lance Rund]]'s article, which was removed at his request, yet we still leave up articles about Moz and Sibe. If I have heard correctly, Sibe had also asked to not be listed. --Anonymous /b/ User {{unsigned|204.110.228.173}}

::::::::There is a single standard, and always has been: The consensus of WikiFur contributors. What you are seeing is that people may come to a different consensus in different situations, just like in real life.

::::::::Exclusion is a privilege, not a right. It has, however, historically been granted by default - that is, people have to give reasons why it should ''not'' be granted. This is because in most cases there are no such reasons. However, there have been several cases in which reasons were presented, and were felt by the community to be sufficient to deny the request for exclusion, and in some cases even a request to remove a real name. While it's hard to set a precise bound on these reasons, they have generally been along the lines of some kind of illegal action, the cause of controversy, and usually concern a recent or ongoing situation rather than a historical one.

::::::::People often consider there to be a [[Wikipedia:public interest|public interest]] which is served by having the article concerned up, too. For example, if an artist has been failing to do commissions, it might be considered wise to have an article about them which notes this, even if they do not want us to. It ''this'' case, the person concerned does not wish us to take note of his continued attempts to force members of the fandom to do his bidding by threats of bodily violence. I am not unappreciative of the view that there could be baiting on the other side, but as a practical matter, Mozdoc considers everyone who disagrees with him to be his enemy, and the mere fact that he has been denied access to FurBid as an aggressive act which must be remedied . . . "or else". He is not likely to be satisfied with anything but complete capitulation and removal of all contrary views, and I think the community has made it plain that this is not going to happen. No person's actions are above commentary by their peers except at the pleasure of those same peers, and it does not please us when a person keeps on threatening others with death when they've been told not to.

::::::::The situation of Lance Rund is somewhat different. He was excluded without fuss (as there was no such public interest in the material on the page about him), but ''also'' wished an item of information about himself to be removed from another article. This was the first time this had come up and there was [[Talk:Further Confusion/Eyes of the Night|extended debate]], the result of which was "it's generally OK to do that as long as it didn't matter exactly who the actor was". That is, his specific identity was tangential to the matter of fact. When you're talking about personal behaviour, that's obviously not the case - you can't just say "a popular artist" isn't doing their commissions. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 20:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::I forgot to post here, but I agree as well. Insomuch that I am no longer going to attempt to defend his actions. (Read his talk page...) - Michichael 01:19 PST 20, May 2007 {{unsigned|Michichael}}

Considering the long discussion and apparent consensus on leaving in Mozdoc's real-life name on this article, I was very surprised to see that [[User:Rat|Rat]] had removed this from the main page. This is apparently not in accord with the 'will of the fandom'. I would like to propose that this change be reverted, unless [[User:Rat|Rat]] would like to justify this undiscussed change. --[[User:Findra|Findra]] 15:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

:The general impression I got was that while users were willing to remove it(admittedly with a few exceptions), there wasn't anyone willing to just go ahead and do it. If I've misjudged, I won't enforce removal if it's against the will of the community. --[[User:Rat|Rat]] 16:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

::Thanks for the response, [[User:Rat|Rat]]. My admittedly brief refresh on this thread suggested that [[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur]], [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]], [[User:DuncanDaHusky|DuncanDaHusky]], and I seemed to be in strongly in favour of keeping the name, but looking back more carefully I see that [[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur]] was offering no strong opinion either way. Only Michichael seemed to be strongly against it, although his most recent post (09:19 PST 20, May 2007) seems to suggest that he might have altered that position. Hence, I still feel that there is a consensus to have the name left in the article. [[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]'s post seems to back up this position, I'd suggest. --[[User:Findra|Findra]] 18:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

:::Personally, I don't mind the removal of Mozdoc's given name, under the provision already suggested by Greenreaper. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]]<sup>([[User talk:Siege|talk]])</sup> 18:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

::::I vote in favor of removing his real name. Give the poor dude a break. He might be a fuckup, sure, but Wikifur is not a government agency or a public service, it's a privately run fandom resource that in my opinion is exercising authority it does not have by taking it upon itself to try to police the actions of individuals. [[Special:Contributions/24.6.68.79|24.6.68.79]] 18:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
::::Whoops! That was me. [[User:Rootdown|Rootdown]] 18:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

:::::I also vote in favor of removing his real name. In all situations online a real name is far less useful than a list of bannable IP addresses, which has obviously been included, along with his known monikers. The only benefit I can see in leaving this guy's name publicly available is that some sort of revenge might be meted out by allowing his Furry-based exploits to threaten his real-world associations. (i.e. -- airing dirty laundry for a potential employer to find should he google-search the player's name), and I would certainly hope the administrators of Wikifur would not condone the use of the Wiki for that purpose. Since it's clear the player in question wants his named removed, I don't think it does any credit to the Furry fandom, the WikiFur community, or anyone here that that particular request is denied. He could have asked more nicely, granted, but his mode of asking doesn't make the request itself less reasonable or its granting less right. [[user:HellcatCordelia|HellcatCordelia]] 12:35, 17 June, 2008 (CST)

::::::[[user:HellcatCordelia|HellcatCordelia]], discussion about the permanent removal of the user's real name is still ongoing on this talk page at the present time. No final decision has been made, hence the revert on the article until some kind of consensus is reached. My opinion on the mater?,... I'm taking a neutral position on this one (not worth the headache.) Will go with the Admin majority's final decision [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 06:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

:::::::Is there some kind of timeframe in place for this decision? The discussion here seems to be largely neutral or in favor of removing the name. Also, I question the wisdom that lays this man's real name vulnerable during the deciding. It seems to me that it would make more sense to remove it until a decision has been made, given that its presence here does have real-world implications. [[User:HellcatCordelia|HellcatCordelia]] 1:30, 17 June 2008, (CST)

:::::::: i am going to cast my vote here, which is for the continued placement of his name on the page.
:::::::: first, it is his name, there is no doubt about it.
:::::::: second, he continues his harassment against not only myself, but others. including, but not limited to death threats, which happens to be a federal crime.
:::::::: individuals who are victims of his harassment may find information which may help them in stopping him from placing them in a constant state of fear for their own safety here.
:::::::: now i am all for forgiveness and giving people breaks. but, i also believe they need to illustrate that they have actually made a change in their behavior to warrant such. he has yet to really make any change.
:::::::: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 02:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC) [tired and not really wanting to type any more]

:::::::::You know, this would be so much easier if you would just shut up and get the hell lost and exit this "fandom". How about that? This article is about me and every time I try to correct something or get something changed that would make continuing my existence in this world much easier, guess who has to show the hell up and fuck with things again? That's right, YOU. How about we all vote to just simply ignore Noriko/Ayukawataur's suggestions and move forward with the removal of my real name? I have ZERO desire to be listed here on WikiFur and if so far its only the outcry of ONE person against many, then tough shit. Move ahead with my name removal so that in the future I can get my ENTIRE article removed and move on. Shut up for once Noriko.
:::::::::--Mozdoc {{unsigned|Mozdoc}}

::::::::::''so that in the future I can get my ENTIRE article removed''
::::::::::No. Too many voices object on that point. Never going to happen. I am not opposed to the removal of your given name from this article, but there are objections and changes of position involved. Tomorrow, I will summarize the votes as stated, including dates and Admin status. Since there ''has'' been an objection raised in the past six days, I'm going to give this another week (to Mon 30 June) for people to comment and acknowledge old votes. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]]<sup>([[User talk:Siege|talk]])</sup> 18:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

As stated under '''Exclusion redux''' and '''Removal of real name?''', I now hereby summarize the opinions given so far on this page as if they were a set of votes, to help establish consensus among the WikiFur community on this point. Registered users may add or change their position and commentary until this period for comment closes on '''Monday the 30th of June'''. On the advice of GreenReaper, I am not noting here who is an admin; you can easily [[WikiFur:Administrators|look it up]] if you want to know. Once we have a fully measured consensus - or its lack, which seems possible, I will have a guideline for what action to take next. Please understand that I am trying not to let my emotions show in this matter, in order to give my actions the appearance of fairness.
;Notes:
* Regardless of belligerence, this action is due to Mozdoc making a request for the single redaction of his legal name, which places him in the "for" category. My taking any action on this is already exceptional (especially since he has shopped around among admins through all possible means of contact, trying to find someone who would give him more than the time of day - and ended up banned from nearly all such avenues of contact due to his rude, solipsistic, domineering, and harassing behavior); should consensus point to removal of his name from this article, I will refuse to make any other change or allow the removal any other information from the page without a further exceptional reason (such as legal enforcement of a judicial ruling).
* There are two other users who appear to have interest primarily in this discussion and little else on WikiFur: Michichael (whose only contributions to the wiki are two comments to this Talk page and a spelling fix on [[Jwoulf]]), and HellcatCordelia (whose only contributions to the wiki are three comments on this Talk page). Because I know of no other reason to refuse it, I will extend full faith and credit to their comments here.

Summary of arguments as of Monday night, 23 June, if all commentary is given one full vote (let me know if I got the interpretation wrong or put you in the wrong category):
:'''+4 for redaction''' (Mozdoc, Michichael, Rootdown, and HellcatCordelia)
Arguments include: Because he wants it and everyone who denies him is stupid and wrong; because he's changed and is currently harmless; WikiFur has no jurisdiction in matters of public interest; displaying the name is a form of punishment which shouldn't be allowed on the wiki.
:'''=3 neutral''' (GreenReaper, Siege, and Spirou)
Responses include: Provisional support provided the public interest has no further need of such information; similar provisional support; refusing to take a position and inherit its pain.
:'''-4 against redaction''' (Spaz Kitty, Findra, DuncanDaHusky, Ayukawataur)
Arguments include: Because he is a threat to others and should be watched; because he has made legally actionable threats, and keeping the name in will be a great time-saver for legal action; reiteration of threat which needs watching; because he has not changed from his prior recorded behavior, and should therefore not receive any greater privilege such as the removal of information.

Balanced, without a clear direction. That's how things stand at the start of this week, as I read them here. If someone wishes to make a clarifying argument, I would be pleased to attend to their words. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]]<sup>([[User talk:Siege|talk]])</sup> 08:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

:The 30th of June conflicts with Anthrocon. Many users from this Wiki will be at the con from the 26th to the 29, and may not even be aware of this vote until after the 30th due to convention-related travel.
:I'd like to ask that the date be pushed back to '''July 7th''', so that all parties may have sufficient time to comment. --[[User:Dmuth|Douglas Muth]] 15:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

::I concur. I'll be out until late on the 30th. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 17:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

:::I vote for redaction as well. I can understand to some degree Mozdoc's hostility in the matter - I have dealt with far too many people who just do not listen to polite requests, and only pay attention when you "get in their face" as the saying goes.

:::What can it hurt to remove his real name from the article? After all, it would be a show of goodwill - and if he DOESN'T calm down as a result, it could always be re-added to the article ;) [[User:AnthroSamurai|All hail VLADUZ - the EBAY IMPALER!]] 10:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

::::I disagree. Its YOUR loss and my gain that it just so happens that the thirtyith coincides with Anthrocon. This voting proceedure will END on the end of this month, and WILL NOT be extended any further. This bullshit has already been dragged out two fucking weeks, I'm not letting it go for a third. Stick to the original ending date and quit putting me through this bullshit.
::::--Mozdoc {{unsigned|Mozdoc}}

::::: no offense jeremy, but i am going to agree with [[User:Dmuth|douglas muth]] above. it is in the better interests of the community to allow for a well informed decision to be made than a hasty one.
::::: and a bit of advice. attempting to dictate to the staff of wikifur how they will run their system is not going to win you any votes among them. in fact, illustrating a measure of patience and respect may actually help your case.
::::: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 16:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

::::: I'm in two minds about this. Do we not come to furries as a way of fantasy flight, to get away from real live? The truth is I read/scanning over this. To say that "Other people make names available so why not us?" is also not right. Most people start on here with only an internet name and grow from there, wishing there real life not to be known. Is this not going to cause people from steering clear of joining groups? Granted I am utterly mortified and disgusted about what I read above and simply could not read some of it. The thing that got me the most is the swearing in the posts. For me if he asks for it to be removed, it should unless he was found guilty in ordinance with the justice system. Looking over this I can see enough that this could happen.
::::: --[[User:VWhitepaw|VWhitepaw]] 18:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

:I say go ahead and remove the name. It's not really necessary to the article and if people really needed to obtain his name for some reason it'd probably be easy enough to find particularly since this debate has been going on for what over a month? --[[User:SnowdriftGM|SnowdriftGM]] 18:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Mozdoc

2008-06-26T18:19:15Z

VWhitepaw: /* Removal of real name? */

<div style="float:right; border:2px solid #bbbbbb; width:150px;">
<center>'''Discussion Pages'''</center>
*[[/Archive1|Archive 1]] (May 2007 - June 2008)
</div>
'''Older conversations have been archived. Please view the links on the right review old threads.'''

== Removal of real name? ==

Exclusion is out. It's fairly clear that this sort of pattern over an extended period of time is notable enough to be recorded. However, I for one would like to see this series of events peter out rather than continue. It's been five years and I suspect both parties are kinda sick of it. I've read over the above, and it seems like a fairly meaningless feud at this point.

With this in mind, I propose that we keep this article (with all appropriate modifications based on the above) but remove Mozdoc's real-life name from it, '''''on the condition''''' that there be nothing that requires the real name to be used in the public interest going forwards. For the avoidance of doubt, "nothing that requires its use" would include things like the need to renew a non-contact order because unwanted contact and/or threats have continued, either offline or online. If there is further need to remove Mozdoc from conventions then this would also be cause for re-addition of the name.

The only thing that makes me willing to suggest this is that so far I've seen no evidence that he actually has the capability to make his threats a reality. To my knowledge, he has not been charged with a violent crime. There is a lot of posturing and a lot of bitterness there, and I would like to have a way to prevent those being expressed in the future. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 09:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

: i really have no opinion on this one. after all, his name is on the restraining order, and on many of the pages which are referenced. so removal would be a pointless gesture.
: it would definitely be nice to forget all of this. as i said before, i hold him no ill will. i am not capable of holding grudges. i never learned how. i will continue to document however. as it is history and others may learn from it to prevent from it being repeated.
: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 10:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

: Speaking purely from a personal perspective, I would urge you to keep Mozdoc's real-life name in this particular page. After following many of the links provided to past and more recent behaviour, they show that Mozdoc has sent death threats to numerous different people. History has proven that such things should never be taken lightly. Having Mozdoc's real-life name on the page would be a useful time-saver for such victims if they wished to go down any legal avenues. --[[User:Findra|Findra]] 17:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

: While it may be true, has it been shown that he's doing any of these recently? Frankly, the arguement that it is a time saver is null and void. In order to persue legal measures, one must feel that his threats would hold merit, meaning that they know who he is and that he has the ability to carry them out, so would be able to legitimately file a claim. Having the name here simply opens a route for harassment, be it due or undue, and is just fueling the fire. If he hasn't done anything in a while, which he hasn't, and if he continues to remain passive, I see no reason to keep the name here. Also, as you've said, if need be they can review the links if they so choose to dig deeper, as they are a matter of public record. The point remains that it is not necessary in the article. --Michichael 00:38, 12 May 2007

:: well, if you get technical, the moment he threatens another, and they have an actual fear, then by law his threats have merit. the law does not look at if they actually carried it out in that case. they look at intent. if a person is in legitimate fear, they have a right for the object of that fear to be stopped.
:: and, ummm. at the risk of sounding a bit repetitive. but he still harasses me at least twice a week minimum. he knows i can not just shut down my avenues of contact due to customer service issues. he also harasses me and my wife at conventions. and his threats remain constant against myself and others.
:: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 19:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

::: Well, you still don't discount my point. This site is for information, not to play tit for tat on a feud between the parties. The real name is not NECESSARY to the merit of the article as it pertains to the fandom. A argument that it aids in legal action is irrelevant as past actions are part of public record, cited, and available on your own wiki. This really seems far too petty for a wiki. -- Michichael 14:18, 14 May 2007 {{unsigned|Michichael}}

:::: please do me th courtesy of not thinking i have anything against him. because i do not have anything for him other than a very unhealthy dose of pity. for some reason i can not feel anything but such for him. and please do not accuse me of using this as a place to get back at him, because there is nothing to get back for.
:::: i am constantly asked by people he threatens about him and what they can/should do. wiki is an information source and people come here for said information regarding jeremy. not for information about me. they deserve to have the same information to find out about him without the legal costs associated with it that i had to go through. because i did not go through it for myself. i did it so the community would have access to information with which to protect themselves from future instances.
:::: and, as a note: [http://furry.wikia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Mozdoc&action=history here] should be more than sufficient to explain his recent behavior.
:::: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 21:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

::::: You still have yet to discount my point. If it is legal action they require, they can get it by contacting you directly, or by viewing the cited material. The direct posting of his name isn't necessary to the article, and has already been shown to cause anxiety to Mozdoc, which comes off as baiting, which has been pointed out elsewhere in this article. This is a private issue between you and Mozdoc, and it really does seem that you have something personal against him. Granted, I'm not defending his actions. I've told him numerous times that he needs to grow up with some of his comments, and would be happy to be a moderator if you two decided to attempt a discussion online. It seems to be that Mozdoc is trying to get back at you for perceived injustices, such as what's posted on this Wiki with his name, and you are continuing to try to goad him.

::::: It is all well and good to document and keep track for legal purposes, which are cited and referenced within the article, however, the inclusion of his RL name within the article seems irrelevant and really comes off as a personal touch of arrogance and "so there" attitude. I fail to see how the rest of the community cares what his real life name is, and if they do feel threatened by him, how having it here helps, over a freely available source elsewhere, through either you or the referenced sources. It's not necessary to the article, and your link to the talk page looks to me like, cleaning up his language, a request to remove it. So obviously you hit a nerve, and are milking it for what it's worth. This is a childish dispute, and really needs to end. Both of you. I'm not going to place blame on either side. I really could care less, but since seeing it, it does come off as an attempt to goad him. Further, I understand his concern about having his real name out there. I personally don't like having my real name available to people either, specifically due to harassment reasons. - Michichael 21:03 PST 15, May 2007 {{unsigned|Michichael}}

::::::Mozdoc has threatened to [http://furry.wikia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Mozdoc&diff=next&oldid=138555 kill Ayukawataur] at Further Confusion next year. Not only would I advise someone letting the FC staff know about these repeated threats (and Ayukawa as well), I once again reemphasize my opposition to removing his name. If he ever followed through on any of his threats, would you still support having his name excluded from the article? Because I'm not willing to take such a gamble in what seems to be a mentally less than stable person. [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]] 17:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

::::::I agree with Spaz Kitty that Mozdoc's real name should remain, for the reasons stated above.----[[User:DuncanDaHusky|DuncanDaHusky]]<sup>([[User talk:DuncanDaHusky|talk]])</sup> 18:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

::::::: I agree that Moz is truly a "Special Child", but we shouldn't allow a doublestandard to be created, see: [[Lance Rund]]'s article, which was removed at his request, yet we still leave up articles about Moz and Sibe. If I have heard correctly, Sibe had also asked to not be listed. --Anonymous /b/ User {{unsigned|204.110.228.173}}

::::::::There is a single standard, and always has been: The consensus of WikiFur contributors. What you are seeing is that people may come to a different consensus in different situations, just like in real life.

::::::::Exclusion is a privilege, not a right. It has, however, historically been granted by default - that is, people have to give reasons why it should ''not'' be granted. This is because in most cases there are no such reasons. However, there have been several cases in which reasons were presented, and were felt by the community to be sufficient to deny the request for exclusion, and in some cases even a request to remove a real name. While it's hard to set a precise bound on these reasons, they have generally been along the lines of some kind of illegal action, the cause of controversy, and usually concern a recent or ongoing situation rather than a historical one.

::::::::People often consider there to be a [[Wikipedia:public interest|public interest]] which is served by having the article concerned up, too. For example, if an artist has been failing to do commissions, it might be considered wise to have an article about them which notes this, even if they do not want us to. It ''this'' case, the person concerned does not wish us to take note of his continued attempts to force members of the fandom to do his bidding by threats of bodily violence. I am not unappreciative of the view that there could be baiting on the other side, but as a practical matter, Mozdoc considers everyone who disagrees with him to be his enemy, and the mere fact that he has been denied access to FurBid as an aggressive act which must be remedied . . . "or else". He is not likely to be satisfied with anything but complete capitulation and removal of all contrary views, and I think the community has made it plain that this is not going to happen. No person's actions are above commentary by their peers except at the pleasure of those same peers, and it does not please us when a person keeps on threatening others with death when they've been told not to.

::::::::The situation of Lance Rund is somewhat different. He was excluded without fuss (as there was no such public interest in the material on the page about him), but ''also'' wished an item of information about himself to be removed from another article. This was the first time this had come up and there was [[Talk:Further Confusion/Eyes of the Night|extended debate]], the result of which was "it's generally OK to do that as long as it didn't matter exactly who the actor was". That is, his specific identity was tangential to the matter of fact. When you're talking about personal behaviour, that's obviously not the case - you can't just say "a popular artist" isn't doing their commissions. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 20:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

:::::::::I forgot to post here, but I agree as well. Insomuch that I am no longer going to attempt to defend his actions. (Read his talk page...) - Michichael 01:19 PST 20, May 2007 {{unsigned|Michichael}}

Considering the long discussion and apparent consensus on leaving in Mozdoc's real-life name on this article, I was very surprised to see that [[User:Rat|Rat]] had removed this from the main page. This is apparently not in accord with the 'will of the fandom'. I would like to propose that this change be reverted, unless [[User:Rat|Rat]] would like to justify this undiscussed change. --[[User:Findra|Findra]] 15:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

:The general impression I got was that while users were willing to remove it(admittedly with a few exceptions), there wasn't anyone willing to just go ahead and do it. If I've misjudged, I won't enforce removal if it's against the will of the community. --[[User:Rat|Rat]] 16:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

::Thanks for the response, [[User:Rat|Rat]]. My admittedly brief refresh on this thread suggested that [[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur]], [[User:SpazKitty|Spaz Kitty]], [[User:DuncanDaHusky|DuncanDaHusky]], and I seemed to be in strongly in favour of keeping the name, but looking back more carefully I see that [[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur]] was offering no strong opinion either way. Only Michichael seemed to be strongly against it, although his most recent post (09:19 PST 20, May 2007) seems to suggest that he might have altered that position. Hence, I still feel that there is a consensus to have the name left in the article. [[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]'s post seems to back up this position, I'd suggest. --[[User:Findra|Findra]] 18:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

:::Personally, I don't mind the removal of Mozdoc's given name, under the provision already suggested by Greenreaper. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]]<sup>([[User talk:Siege|talk]])</sup> 18:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

::::I vote in favor of removing his real name. Give the poor dude a break. He might be a fuckup, sure, but Wikifur is not a government agency or a public service, it's a privately run fandom resource that in my opinion is exercising authority it does not have by taking it upon itself to try to police the actions of individuals. [[Special:Contributions/24.6.68.79|24.6.68.79]] 18:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
::::Whoops! That was me. [[User:Rootdown|Rootdown]] 18:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

:::::I also vote in favor of removing his real name. In all situations online a real name is far less useful than a list of bannable IP addresses, which has obviously been included, along with his known monikers. The only benefit I can see in leaving this guy's name publicly available is that some sort of revenge might be meted out by allowing his Furry-based exploits to threaten his real-world associations. (i.e. -- airing dirty laundry for a potential employer to find should he google-search the player's name), and I would certainly hope the administrators of Wikifur would not condone the use of the Wiki for that purpose. Since it's clear the player in question wants his named removed, I don't think it does any credit to the Furry fandom, the WikiFur community, or anyone here that that particular request is denied. He could have asked more nicely, granted, but his mode of asking doesn't make the request itself less reasonable or its granting less right. [[user:HellcatCordelia|HellcatCordelia]] 12:35, 17 June, 2008 (CST)

::::::[[user:HellcatCordelia|HellcatCordelia]], discussion about the permanent removal of the user's real name is still ongoing on this talk page at the present time. No final decision has been made, hence the revert on the article until some kind of consensus is reached. My opinion on the mater?,... I'm taking a neutral position on this one (not worth the headache.) Will go with the Admin majority's final decision [[User:Spirou|Spirou]] 06:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

:::::::Is there some kind of timeframe in place for this decision? The discussion here seems to be largely neutral or in favor of removing the name. Also, I question the wisdom that lays this man's real name vulnerable during the deciding. It seems to me that it would make more sense to remove it until a decision has been made, given that its presence here does have real-world implications. [[User:HellcatCordelia|HellcatCordelia]] 1:30, 17 June 2008, (CST)

:::::::: i am going to cast my vote here, which is for the continued placement of his name on the page.
:::::::: first, it is his name, there is no doubt about it.
:::::::: second, he continues his harassment against not only myself, but others. including, but not limited to death threats, which happens to be a federal crime.
:::::::: individuals who are victims of his harassment may find information which may help them in stopping him from placing them in a constant state of fear for their own safety here.
:::::::: now i am all for forgiveness and giving people breaks. but, i also believe they need to illustrate that they have actually made a change in their behavior to warrant such. he has yet to really make any change.
:::::::: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 02:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC) [tired and not really wanting to type any more]

:::::::::You know, this would be so much easier if you would just shut up and get the hell lost and exit this "fandom". How about that? This article is about me and every time I try to correct something or get something changed that would make continuing my existence in this world much easier, guess who has to show the hell up and fuck with things again? That's right, YOU. How about we all vote to just simply ignore Noriko/Ayukawataur's suggestions and move forward with the removal of my real name? I have ZERO desire to be listed here on WikiFur and if so far its only the outcry of ONE person against many, then tough shit. Move ahead with my name removal so that in the future I can get my ENTIRE article removed and move on. Shut up for once Noriko.
:::::::::--Mozdoc {{unsigned|Mozdoc}}

::::::::::''so that in the future I can get my ENTIRE article removed''
::::::::::No. Too many voices object on that point. Never going to happen. I am not opposed to the removal of your given name from this article, but there are objections and changes of position involved. Tomorrow, I will summarize the votes as stated, including dates and Admin status. Since there ''has'' been an objection raised in the past six days, I'm going to give this another week (to Mon 30 June) for people to comment and acknowledge old votes. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]]<sup>([[User talk:Siege|talk]])</sup> 18:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

As stated under '''Exclusion redux''' and '''Removal of real name?''', I now hereby summarize the opinions given so far on this page as if they were a set of votes, to help establish consensus among the WikiFur community on this point. Registered users may add or change their position and commentary until this period for comment closes on '''Monday the 30th of June'''. On the advice of GreenReaper, I am not noting here who is an admin; you can easily [[WikiFur:Administrators|look it up]] if you want to know. Once we have a fully measured consensus - or its lack, which seems possible, I will have a guideline for what action to take next. Please understand that I am trying not to let my emotions show in this matter, in order to give my actions the appearance of fairness.
;Notes:
* Regardless of belligerence, this action is due to Mozdoc making a request for the single redaction of his legal name, which places him in the "for" category. My taking any action on this is already exceptional (especially since he has shopped around among admins through all possible means of contact, trying to find someone who would give him more than the time of day - and ended up banned from nearly all such avenues of contact due to his rude, solipsistic, domineering, and harassing behavior); should consensus point to removal of his name from this article, I will refuse to make any other change or allow the removal any other information from the page without a further exceptional reason (such as legal enforcement of a judicial ruling).
* There are two other users who appear to have interest primarily in this discussion and little else on WikiFur: Michichael (whose only contributions to the wiki are two comments to this Talk page and a spelling fix on [[Jwoulf]]), and HellcatCordelia (whose only contributions to the wiki are three comments on this Talk page). Because I know of no other reason to refuse it, I will extend full faith and credit to their comments here.

Summary of arguments as of Monday night, 23 June, if all commentary is given one full vote (let me know if I got the interpretation wrong or put you in the wrong category):
:'''+4 for redaction''' (Mozdoc, Michichael, Rootdown, and HellcatCordelia)
Arguments include: Because he wants it and everyone who denies him is stupid and wrong; because he's changed and is currently harmless; WikiFur has no jurisdiction in matters of public interest; displaying the name is a form of punishment which shouldn't be allowed on the wiki.
:'''=3 neutral''' (GreenReaper, Siege, and Spirou)
Responses include: Provisional support provided the public interest has no further need of such information; similar provisional support; refusing to take a position and inherit its pain.
:'''-4 against redaction''' (Spaz Kitty, Findra, DuncanDaHusky, Ayukawataur)
Arguments include: Because he is a threat to others and should be watched; because he has made legally actionable threats, and keeping the name in will be a great time-saver for legal action; reiteration of threat which needs watching; because he has not changed from his prior recorded behavior, and should therefore not receive any greater privilege such as the removal of information.

Balanced, without a clear direction. That's how things stand at the start of this week, as I read them here. If someone wishes to make a clarifying argument, I would be pleased to attend to their words. -- [[User:Siege|Siege]]<sup>([[User talk:Siege|talk]])</sup> 08:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

:The 30th of June conflicts with Anthrocon. Many users from this Wiki will be at the con from the 26th to the 29, and may not even be aware of this vote until after the 30th due to convention-related travel.
:I'd like to ask that the date be pushed back to '''July 7th''', so that all parties may have sufficient time to comment. --[[User:Dmuth|Douglas Muth]] 15:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

::I concur. I'll be out until late on the 30th. --[[User:GreenReaper|GreenReaper]]<sup>([[User talk:GreenReaper|talk]])</sup> 17:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

:::I vote for redaction as well. I can understand to some degree Mozdoc's hostility in the matter - I have dealt with far too many people who just do not listen to polite requests, and only pay attention when you "get in their face" as the saying goes.

:::What can it hurt to remove his real name from the article? After all, it would be a show of goodwill - and if he DOESN'T calm down as a result, it could always be re-added to the article ;) [[User:AnthroSamurai|All hail VLADUZ - the EBAY IMPALER!]] 10:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

::::I disagree. Its YOUR loss and my gain that it just so happens that the thirtyith coincides with Anthrocon. This voting proceedure will END on the end of this month, and WILL NOT be extended any further. This bullshit has already been dragged out two fucking weeks, I'm not letting it go for a third. Stick to the original ending date and quit putting me through this bullshit.
::::--Mozdoc {{unsigned|Mozdoc}}

::::: no offense jeremy, but i am going to agree with [[User:Dmuth|douglas muth]] above. it is in the better interests of the community to allow for a well informed decision to be made than a hasty one.
::::: and a bit of advice. attempting to dictate to the staff of wikifur how they will run their system is not going to win you any votes among them. in fact, illustrating a measure of patience and respect may actually help your case.
::::: --[[User:Ayukawataur|Ayukawataur : FurBid-SF Administaur]] 16:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

::::: I'm in two minds about this. Do we not come to furries as a way of fantasy flight, to get away from real live? The truth is read/scanning over this he was not found guilty in a Justice system. To say that "Other people make names available so why not us?" is also not right. Most people start on here with only an internet name and grow from there, wishing there real life not to be known. Is this not going to cause people from steering clear of joining groups? Granted I am utterly mortified and disgusted about what I read above and simply could not read some of it. The thing that got me the most is the swearing in the posts. For me if he asks for it to be removed, it should unless he was found guilty in ordinance with the justice system. Looking over this I can see enough that this could happen.
::::: --[[User:VWhitepaw|VWhitepaw]] 18:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)