Creative Commons license icon

Horrific car accident takes the life of a Furry Raider

Your rating: None Average: 3.4 (13 votes)

Overshadowed.jpg
On June 6th, 2017, on a bridge in Charleston, South Carolina a furry who went by the fursona name Xzavior Wolf died during a car accident. After the initial crash, he had left the car and as a result was crushed between vehicles due to another vehicle hitting the current wreckage.

The incident is a stark reminder of the fragility of life, and that it can be taken in an instant. It is usually during these times that we reflect upon their life, and celebrate what they brought to the table. However, this is where things get a bit awkward and complicated. For the one who had lost their life that night happened to be a part of an infamous organization within the fandom that had ties with the closure of a convention a few months prior and reworked Nazi symbology.

Xzavior, was indeed, a member of the Furry Raiders. And so when the news of their death was confirmed by the group on Twitter, the reactions were as divided and controversial as the organization in which he was affiliated.

Reactions in the Fandom

While those in the Furry Raiders, and other philosophically alt-right organizations mourned and shared condolences, they were not alone in their respectful tones. One example of a person overcoming their disagreements to show sympathy for the loss is BoilerRoo, who is known for having a character with an anti-fascist stint. They even starred in propaganda punching a nazi furry who looks similar to the Raider leader’s constructed fursona. However, in the end, they put aside the vast disagreement with their political philosophy to wish them condolences for their loss.

Of course not everyone believed that empathy is a proper way to respond to those that showed patronage to a an organization that shows none in life. Others took the Bill Mahar v. Jerry Farwell approach. One particularly harsh tweet questioned: "Who would win in a fight? A greasy Nazifur or the new Buick Lacrosse?" Tweets such as this have brought up rowdy debate on hypocrisy on both sides. Those in the alt-right wing point out that such jokes about the deaths of minorities would be considered heinous by those making this joke and so are showing that those on the other side of the aisle are not against low brow humor, but only favor it when it meshes with their politic. Those on the left counter with the argument that the deceased had made jokes about the holocaust and other tragedies and therefore they should expect equal treatment in kind.

Reflections upon a tragedy

Personally, I find it tragic on many levels. A life cut short is always the loss of potential. While a person may have had poor world-view in the moment of their death, there was always opportunity to turn away from that in time. Particularly the youthful, vulnerable, and angry could easily turn away from such feelings as they mature. But the capacity for any chance at redemption here was lost.

In addition to that, on most obituaries we would tend to discuss the things the fur created in life. We would talk about what their contributions were to the fandom at large. Whether it be the webcomic they poured their life into, the convention they toiled to get off the ground, or simply being a supportive friend who backed the talents of others; there should be something here.

Unfortunately, the only thing visible here to talk about is that they joined the Furry Raiders and that they had died. The controversy over the reaction to their death is the only thing they at this point that they will be remembered for in the fandom. And in the end, I would hope that we would wish to be remembered for more than just an armband and the way we died.

Comments

Your rating: None Average: 5 (7 votes)

"But the capacity for any chance at redemption here was lost...

And in the end, I would hope that we would wish to be remembered for more than just an armband and the way we died."

If we are to take any lesson from this, it should be that every day of life is one which should be cherished and used for good. We only have so much time for redemption. Being edgy and controversial is fun when you are young, but edgy, controversial personaities are a dime a dozen. Living a life of kindness and love is harder, but more rewarding in the end, for all of us and society as a whole.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

Shorter - Inernet trolls are real people who die. Whatever they posted makes a legacy. Some people might use it for inappropriate trolling about them. The dead person's friends might use that to justify the same trolling he was doing and the cycle continues. Stop living on the internet and don't be a troll.

I saw it happen, the deceased guy posted stuff about "niggers" and a few people who didn't like him used it to inappropriately mock a death. They can't get at him any more so it only harms family/friends. Trolls gonna troll so it's also not a good time for those friends to jump on a soapbox about how it's OK to post "niggers". I saw one who just couldn't back down from making it a big deal, until his own words got to be so shameful that he had to lock his account. And others of his friends are pretending that "leftists" are attacking a dead guy as if that's a formal group who sanctions anything that happens anywhere on the internet.

Now all I know about the dead guy is that he was a Furry Raider and posted "niggers". There's an obituary somewhere and that's the appropriate thing to share about him. That's what his friends could have done to be mature about this. Or it could be useful to learn about art he did or contribution to running meets or whatever, the kind of thing a furry obit could share, but I haven't seen any.

It's shameful of people to mock him, and to use that to defend hate speech and fake pretense like trolls and "leftists" are the same thing. It also seems pretty shallow of his friends to post little more than calling him a furry member of their group. A person is more than their hobby or some bad facts about them, but you wouldn't know it in this case.

I don't think there's anything furry about the circumstances of his death and I don't think linking him to a despised group contributes anything. So personally it makes me think this is not a worthwhile story for furry news. Pretty much ditto the last paragraphs of the article but I would just leave it up to his friends to find more worthwhile stuff to say if they want to get around to it. Considering their history I don't expect it.

Your rating: None Average: 3.8 (8 votes)

He was a furry, he died, and was well enough known. That makes the article worthwhile IMO. As for the focus on him being a Raider...they're a hot topic right now so it's going to be relevant. For better or worse his involvement with them will be his legacy. He was clearly proud of being one, so if that's how he wants to be remembered so be it.

Your rating: None Average: 4.3 (4 votes)

I may not like the Raiders, but the loss of a life is the loss of a life. and that is a tragedy

Your rating: None

What's the intent of the article? Is it the death of a person in the fandom, the reaction to the death, or larger commentary on the ongoing strife related to Raiders?

I can't really say it's about the death except maybe tangentially, because the article only mentions his name, when and how he died, and that he was a member of the Furry Raiders. Would he have been notable if he was not a member?

All in all, not sure how to take this one.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

I'm going to ignore the Furry Raider connection for the moment, and focus more on the accident. There's some more details in a Post and Courier article on the accident.

In short, a Buick died on the bridge after dark and Xzadfor's car ran into it (he was a passenger there). He was able to get out, and I'm assuming the car having road flares that he was getting, when a Subaru squished him by accident.

The blame... well, I kinda wonder why the driver of the Mitsubishi Xzadfor was in ran into the broken-down Buick.

Your rating: None

The investigation is ongoing and it's pointless to speculate.

Your rating: None

Believe me, the comment was going to be a lot longer due to questions.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

Those in the alt-right wing point out that such jokes about the deaths of minorities would be considered heinous by those making this joke and so are showing that those on the other side of the aisle are not against low brow humor, but only favor it when it meshes with their politic. Those on the left counter with the argument that the deceased had made jokes about the holocaust and other tragedies and therefore they should expect equal treatment in kind.

It hasn't actually been a "left" vs "alt right" thing from what I've seen.

I think Flayrah articles about people passing has much better form when it at least includes reflections on the person from people who actually knew them.

Most of the people I've seen commenting on this, particularly those saying, "oh see we have to be careful how we will be remembered!" didn't know the person even tangentially. Seems they're all just commenting on it to get their faces known, even people I consider my friends have been talking at length about this kid's "legacy". Even in this article you do it, Sonious. Did you even know this guy existed before you saw people talking about his death?

Sure the fact that this "controversy" exists would have been noteworthy of an article here, but you didn't include any statements from his actual friends, but you didn't even link to or reference the statement released by the Raiders, let alone any individuals who knew him, and I think it's a reasonable guess that you didn't approach any for comment either.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

He did link to the statement from the Furry Raiders. It's there right under the heading about reactions from the fandom.

I didn't know this guy other than the negative controversy about him. But that's the point sorta. If someone is known to unaffiliated third parties only for negative associations, and then dies, they've lost a chance to be known for good and it can never be recovered. That adds tragedy on top of tragedy.

Your rating: None

So he gave more weight to his own opinion on the negative associations he/other people are gonna have for a guy he/other people have never known in a story about the person than what people who actually knew him will remember him for?

Your rating: None Average: 3 (3 votes)

We have no choice but to do so. It would be different if his chosen association was habitat for humanity or some group saving vets or starving children. If that were the case, and if that's what he was metaphorically wearing on his sleeve, then that's what we would know him for.

One's public reputation is not defined by their personal relationships with like-minded fellows. It is defined by what you do or fail to do at a societal level.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

I think Flayrah articles about people passing has much better form when it at least includes reflections on the person from people who actually knew them.

While I can understand your critique, I will note that I knew the deceased here as well as any of the others I wrote about before:

https://www.flayrah.com/6883/gene-catlow-comic-series-creator-albert-temple-dies-59
https://www.flayrah.com/6828/spike-boss-pony-nico-founder-club-rainbow-tiger-passes
https://www.flayrah.com/4620/fursuiter-lemonade-coyote-dies-crash-while-emt-duty

The issue here is that I can only see what is visible. Like it or dislike it, most of us are only known by one another through our engagement on the internet. Usually the distance and anonymity can be a comfort, but it is in that comfort one has to be cautious. Because it is through that engagement in how people will remember you. So if you drop N-bombs or make holocaust jokes, then well that's how people will remember you. Which may seem unfair, but I feel the response of victims of genocide will tell you, it's more respectful than some are given.

The leaders of the Raiders live in the Colorado area while their member lives in South Carolina. So it is fair to say that their opinion would be just as obfuscated by geographical distance as my own. They too would merely be reacting to their actions on the internet.

So the question is who actually knew him? Probably the ones in the car with him at the time. And obviously the one who made the connection that Mr. Freeman was indeed the one who had the fursona of Xzavior Wolf. If they would like to say a few words they may. I expect them to box my ears a bit, kind of surprised they have not yet.

My style in obits has been more "review of life" than the standard fair, so "journalistic" would be a bit of a stretch on the style here. It starts off that way because the facts were needed at the start to know the events surrounding it.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

By "knew him" I wasn't trying to mean "knew him in person, not just online".

If they would like to say a few words they may.

In my opinion, you had a responsibility to approach these people, or at least find already-existing public statements by them, if they existed. Or hell, even invite them to comment in the article itself...instead of in the comments after someone complains. (And I don't think linking to them in passing really counts if you devoted an entire section to your own; in the other obits you linked you directly quoted people or included art.)

My style in obits has been more "review of life" than the standard fair

You spend almost no time talking about him or his life, just the responses of the fandom's many grandstanders. Which is a fine article to write; just, like, own it man. And also maybe don't devote a whole section of it to you doing the same thing.

Your rating: None Average: 3.5 (2 votes)

There's a couple things at work here.

The first issue is, why is this story relevant to the readers of this site, none of whom probably knew this guy and all of whom are simply members of the furry community? Well, it is only relevant in the same way that a story about the passing of a Convention volunteer or chairperson is relevant. Like, for example, the person involved in MFF who died in a car accident on the way back from the con. Basically, those people have some presence in the furry community due to their deeds in the community, and so their passing has some interest to us. In the case of those involved in facilitating a con, we think of their deeds as good for the community. We really don't know them personally though, so we have little knowledge about how good they truly were in other areas. We simply know that they had a positive reputation in the general furry community due to their deeds in the community. This same reasoning would apply to someone who passed and all the community knows about them is their association with something that is a big and controversial issue in the community. Whatever your personal opinion of the furry raiders, they are a controversial group and I think the facts would show that they do not enjoy a good reputation in the community.

So again, this type of article will likely have relevance to us furies if we either have someone who passed and was known for a good thing in the community, or someone who has passed and is known for something that is at least perceived by a majority of the community as being negative. That's really the only thing that is of import to the average reader in my opinion. So this type of article wouldn't be of too much use to the average reader of this site if instead of focusing on one of those two larger themes, it simply noted that a furry person died and they had loving fiends and family. Furry people are dying all the time, and most will have at least some friends and family.

Again, I think this is only "news" because of the negative controversy, in the same way it would only be news if he had helped found or run a convention. So thats why I think it makes sense that the story focuses on the furry controversy info - that is the only thing that is news for furries. I'm sure there will be local obituaries for him that will discuss the non-furry aspect of his life and he will probably have a loving funeral by his family, who probably have no knowledge about any of the furry raider stuff or any controversies he was involved in. But that type of story would have no relevance to the general furry public who only knows that he was a member of the furry raiders and said some bad things.

So that's why I don't think it's fair to demand Sonious investigate this guy's personal life and relationships before posting this article, because that stuff isn't really relevant to a furry news site. What is relevant is what is discussed in the article. And at the end of the day, that's why I agreed it is tragic, because among most of our community, he will just be known for his armband and how he died.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

I don't disagree that the article should have been written, just that he was out of line for including his opinion on some guy's death, prioritizing his own navel-gazing over people actually involved with the person. If he hadn't included his "reflections" and stuck with "X passed away, here's who he was, here's what happened, here's a related event that happened because of it", I would also have had no issue, but he did include it, and participated in the same "controversy" he's trying to detail here, so I did take issue.

It's not fair to think someone writing a news story has a "due diligence" responsibility? okay.

Your rating: None Average: 3.5 (2 votes)

I don't think "due diligence" is the critique you have here, otherwise you would have called me out on it in earlier obits because I had just as many interviews with the friends of the deceased in those as this.

I think the "neutrality" thing, which is more what separates this obit from the others. It was something I had to think a lot about before I had published. However in the end I felt this was kind of the point. The fallen didn't live his life neutrally, so I think it'd be more a disservice to respond to a life like that with a sense of neutrality. It is more honorable to be genuine since he was being genuine, if but controversial, in life.

Your rating: None Average: 2.5 (2 votes)

Well I think you are arguing two distinct things. On the one hand, you are arguing that Sonious should have done "due diligence" in gathering more personal information about this individual from friends and family to include in the article. On the other hand, you are arguing that Sonious shouldn't have included his own opinion on this person's faults and those of his associates.

Regarding the first issue, I already addressed that I think but let's go down that road for a moment and assume that Sonious went and interviewed people in this guy's home neighborhood to learn more about him as a person. Again, I would question why that would be important to the average furry reader, but assume for the moment he did that and learned that this guy was accused by his neighbors of some heinous crime, or that he had been expelled from school, or was a drug addict? If the idea is that we want a fuller picture of him as a human, well now Sonious needs to publish this additional information about him to give the more full picture. It's just as likely that he could learn such terrible things about this individual that he could learn that he had loving friends and family. So my point is, in this instance, I don't think any of that is relevant enough to say Sonious didn't do his proper due diligence by not discovering such information, which wouldn't really be relevant to furry news. It might be different if he was a major public figure or person in a position of authority, but I don't think such non-furry info is all that important here.

To the second point, I suppose it depends on whether you think Flayrah is a news site that should allow for opinion/punditry type commentary or should only present facts. That's really up to the management and the readers who provide the traffic and dictate what they want, so I suppose it's essentially a market decision. In that context, I don't think one can say it is "wrong" as the market would dictate whether that was acceptable or not.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (2 votes)

Well I think you are arguing two distinct things. On the one hand, you are arguing that Sonious should have done "due diligence" in gathering more personal information about this individual from friends and family to include in the article. On the other hand, you are arguing that Sonious shouldn't have included his own opinion on this person's faults and those of his associates.

I'm not arguing two things as much as I'm arguing one thing and my suggested solution is different depending what he wanted out of the article. To wit: 1. If he wanted to write a news piece about the death, it should have focused more on the person himself (for example, did you know he studied culinary arts? If all you knew about him was from this article you wouldn't!) or been a brief detailing of facts, and 2. If he wanted to make it an article about the reaction/controversy/Tweetstorm that occurred in light of his death, he shouldn't have included so much of his own opinion at the expense of the opinions of people who knew him personally (not necessarily in-person, but personally).

So my point is, in this instance, I don't think any of that is relevant enough to say Sonious didn't do his proper due diligence by not discovering such information, which wouldn't really be relevant to furry news.

Why are those things not relevant, but some nobody on Twitter joking that he can't take a Subaru to the ass is suddenly of note?

To the second point, I suppose it depends on whether you think Flayrah is a news site that should allow for opinion/punditry type commentary or should only present facts. That's really up to the management and the readers who provide the traffic and dictate what they want, so I suppose it's essentially a market decision. In that context, I don't think one can say it is "wrong" as the market would dictate whether that was acceptable or not.

Um, hi Cody, nice to meet you, I'm Equivamp and I am part of the readership/"market" here. Have been for like six years now. I'll let you in on a secret about how we "dictate what we want" here: we gripe in the comment sections! Hence why my original comment was a general one about Flayrah articles about people passing.

If what you got from my comments was that I'm against people posting opinion here period you've really got the wrong guy.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

I still think what you are requesting in (1) is not really furry news. A story about someone who has died is really only relevant to the furry readership to the extent that the person did or did not do things of some import or relevance within the community. If I wanted to read about this individual's personal life outside of their furry-related activities, I would go find a normal obituary in their local paper or attend their funeral. Those are the places where people are going to simply discuss their personal life outside of furrydom. However, I just don't see how that is news to the general furry community. I'm not saying that that information is totally uninteresting, and I would suspect that if someone was interested enough in this person's life beyond their furry activities they could scour the internet to find this info. But for a site like this, it seems like whatever is being put forth should have some "newsworthy" value for furries.

Consider for example the articles put forth by the mainstream press about the accident that caused the person's death. Those articles operate on a similar question of "newsworthiness," but just for the general public. I read four different articles (which are linked here) to see if any of them talked about anything other than the way that the individual died. The only thing included other than the facts about his death was a comment that he was an Ohio person who moved to SC.

http://www.live5news.com/story/35611335/crash-on-the-ravenel-bridge-leaves-one-d...
http://counton2.com/2017/06/07/man-killed-in-crash-on-ravenel-bridge/
http://www.postandcourier.com/news/one-dead-two-seriously-injured-after-pair-of-...
http://abcnews4.com/news/local/cpd-crash-on-ravenel-bridge-was-fatal

None of the people who wrote those articles went and interviewed his friends and family to learn of his personal life or whether he was, for example, in culinary school. In other words, the only things that were newsworthy to the mainstream press were: (i) a certain type of accident occurred on this bridge, (ii) one man died, (iii) his name, and (iv) that he was a transplant to that area. So we would ask the same question, what is newsworthy to furry news? In this situation, the only thing beyond the mainstream press's reporting that is newsworthy to furry news is that this individual was in fact a furry and was involved in a group that is controversial in the furry community. Whether he was also in culinary school, or where he went to high school, or who he was dating, or where he worked, or... as I noted above, any negative information that might be learned about his non-furry life through a more in depth investigation... information like this is not generally furry news. So that's why I'm not understanding why you are saying it needs to be in a furry news article.

For your point (2), as indicated, I do think the controversy is the only real furry news here. The article presents the controversy and presents the reactions of Furry raiders and their allies, and those who are against furry raiders. Some of those reactions are offensive, and the article notes the offensive nature of those responses, but a reader could make their own decision about the reactions as the links are provided in the article. The article then ends with a section of Sonious putting forth his views on how the person's death was tragic due to the fact that we (i.e. furries on the internet) will only remember him for his negative association and the manner of his death.

Again, if he had also been known in our community for organizing a convention or being a talented artist or writer who's work was beloved, or setting up a furmeet, or helping furs who were in trouble, then that's what would be in the article. Or, if he was such a dedicated worker with habitat for humanity for example, and he raised money for them in a fursuit, or he promoted them at furry events or on his FA page, that would be in the article.

However, the biggest thing furry-related that we know about this individual was that he was a member of the furry raiders. That's it. You are saying Sonious should not have included so much of his opinion of this individual and should have instead gotten opinions of those close to him. I don't really understand why that should be on Sonious. He is the one writing this article. If those people want to write an article, they certainly have that power, and they could say whatever they want about him. I think Sonious' opinions were fairly nuanced here. He didn't go into all of this individual's troubling statements, which certainly would have been possible.

For example, out of curiosity, I went through this person's Twitter feed and yes, he did throw around the N word, indicated he had issues with black people, talked about his shotgun being shoved up someone's behind and the trigger being pulled, and mentioned that he hated all of humanity and wished for all humans to be eradicated.

https://twitter.com/XzaviorWolf/status/862016723746258948
https://twitter.com/XzaviorWolf/status/862014346020442114
https://twitter.com/XzaviorWolf/status/868139049109905409
https://twitter.com/XzaviorWolf/status/862016853262168064

There were also a few tweets where he seemed to indicate that Foxler had something big planned that would affect the furry community (e.g. "I know Foxler's true intentions" "ya'll will care soon" "I know what is to come").

https://twitter.com/XzaviorWolf/status/862021362692567041
https://twitter.com/XzaviorWolf/status/862024247190990848

I really have no idea what he was referring to there, but to be honest it is at least a little bit threatening. Now, to be fair, if you go to his most recent tweets he does indicate some kind of apology for his outbursts:

https://twitter.com/XzaviorWolf/status/868745756068413440

But this is my point. I'm sure if you went and did a more in depth expose on this individual, you would find a lot more... His twitter feed actually probably is relevant to furries since he is mostly talking about the furry raiders and having it out with people over that, but I think based on what is in those tweets, I don't think a more personal investigation into his life would cast him in a particularly good light. So I don't think Sonious' brief article with a short statement about the tragedy of being remembered for an armband and the way one died was really unfair to this person, and I think general discussions about redemption within the community are also appropriate in that regard.

Your rating: None Average: 1.7 (3 votes)

I only skimmed all that but the fact other news sites only reported on his passing and not on his life is my literal point, if you're gonna do it then do it right. You're talking both sides of your mouth here, saying he didn't make a story about his life at the same time as saying he did and that I'm being unfair for criticizing it.

You mention if he'd been known for organizing a convention, well the guy only came into anyone's attention really because he was involved with an attempt by the Raiders to start a convention and hide their involvement until after it took place in an attempt to change peoples' minds about them (which is what those "threatening" Tweets were about). I'm not sure that it's still a plan but there's definitely furry-related stuff to report on this guy, more furry related than Sonious inflating how much he will "remember" this guy to report on his "legacy" in his own mind so that we will all know his super-important opinion on something that will never actually affect him.

Your rating: None Average: 1.8 (5 votes)

Unlike you, I am not going to vote "1 star" on your replies simply because I disagree with your opinion. And no, it is not talking both sides of my mouth where I referred to the news articles only commenting on the facts of his death because, as I said, that is the only thing that is newsworthy to the average public. That is what I went over in my response that you say you didn't actually read all of. For the furry public, the only thing that is newsworthy beyond the circumstances of his death is his involvement in furry controversies. So it is certainly logical that an article on a furry news site would then focus on that controversy, and people are likely to put forth their opinions on that. That's just the difference between a general news article and a furry news article. We are interested in the furry connection that is related to his death, and in this case, the furry connection is his involvement in a controversial group and people's opinions about that group.

If you have some inside information about this guy's plans for a furry raider lead convention then you could just put that out there in your response to the article. I don't know how you expect anyone else to know that when you just acknowledged that this person and the furry raiders were keeping it a secret intentionally... But even so, you are saying that it may have never come to fruition, so i'm not sure if it is all that newsworthy that he may have been involved with planning a furry raider lead convention but never got beyond the planning stage?

But yea, if you have this information and can give some sourcing on it, then you should provide it and you could ask Sonious to update his article. I just don't think it helps to complain about Sonious not finding out secret information about this guy's involvement in a potential furry raider con. And if you have any other secret info about this individual's involvement in the community, you should bring that to Sonious' attention as well?

Your rating: None Average: 3 (3 votes)

Hey, we already had our fill of complaints about the star system last month. Try again next year. He was literally, literally not involved in any controversy detailed in this article. Joined the Raiders after any controversy they had and was dead for the "controversy" of people making tasteless jokes and other people going "ew why would you do that" and then people trying to make it into a left vs right thing.

It's...not inside information. I already said he came to peoples' attention because of it, as it was made public. If it hadn't nobody would have known he was a Raider or even...existed. It's public info that honestly Sonious probably knew seeing as he's said he "knew" the guy. And my criticism isn't even that he chose not to include that specific information, it's that he, again, prioritized his own opinion on something/someone he has no connection to over that of people who do, for better or worse of those peoples' views. His own opinion is given its own section roughly equal in length to the entirety of the discussion of others' views. If you're gonna defend him on the basis of relevancy explain to me how his grandstanding is more "relevant" to this story than the section above it?

Your rating: None Average: 3.8 (4 votes)

Like all other obits on this site we are reacting through the words and reaction to the death through the community itself. Each were put on an equal playing field.

Are there people in life that panned the behaviors of Gene Catlow, Spike Nico, or Lemonade Coyote? Sure, if someone exists there's probably someone out there who doesn't care for someone. However, at the time of their death they were not all that vocal from my recollection. Do they exist? More than likely.

The only other more controversial death I can think of was around Starblade, at least he left us with "F*ck you, I'm a dragon."

And, like it or not, myself writing an obit of anyone is an opinion that there was something worth writing about. There are probably dozens of furries that die without even an utterance or newsbyte here. I find this unfortunate but there are reasons: a person may not have their furry identity tied to their human one (this could easily happen to myself ironically at this point), they kept their circle of friends small enough so that the news of their passing doesn't expand out past that circle (but a tree that falls without others around indeed still makes a mournful sound), or the person and their friends purposefully keep it to themselves for wishes of privacy.

Inaction, however, is still an action. I'm surprised that the debate hasn't come along of "Why write about some lives lost, but not of this other one?" Things like that.

In the end though I will give thought on your critique of: 'the last section should be relegated to the comment section.' I will take that into consideration in the future. Thanks.

Your rating: None

Putting it in the comments would have left a better taste in my mouth I guess, yeah. I have no reason to be this upset about this anyway. Sorry.

Speaking of Starblade, this comment didn't age well unfortunately, with the Jon Dargis homicide happening the year after and then the more recent Fullerton triple homicide.

Your rating: None

Oh? There was one before the Fullerton one? I wasn't aware of that.

(Unfortunately I didn't suspect at the time it was made that that record would last forever)

Your rating: None

The little-known furry connection was the topic of a piece I did. There was a short one here too. I think it was treated with silence because nobody wants to be connected to that. Which can make problems worse, such as causing contributing factors to be downplayed and ignored in the build up to future horrible things. The worst things happen behind turned backs.

The "all media is National Enquirer" propaganda is on full blast right now for the Fullerton story. Some people said such stuff to my face, but then they could only do an "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" thing when I debated that Vice got an Ursa nomination for their great coverage of the gas attack at MFF. They were like "I bet nobody read that" (lots did???) I was contacted today by that Vice journalist asking for assistance about Fullerton, which will be a story whether furs speak honestly or treat it like something to hide.

Calling everything "fake news" is how fake news won at least in the short term. It's good times for anti-intellectualism.

Your rating: None

In addition, no the only reason I knew the guy was because of the Raiders announcing his death the controversy stemmed on my feed based upon that death.

We don't all know everything, we only all know some things.

I was expecting this article to raise some brow-beating, ironically I thought it would have been from the Raiders themselves more than anything.

But to be a bit fair, the last statement could apply to someone only being known on making punchlines about people fighting and losing against automobiles as well.

Your rating: None Average: 3.5 (2 votes)

Kind of is depressing how life is so fragile. Ever since I've witnessed people around me lose parents, I've lived to the tune of "treat others as if they'll die tomorrow". If a friend died tomorrow, I'd feel pretty terrible if the words that they took to their graves from my mouth were in bad taste. And I also always try to live as if I'll be dead tomorrow, because regret really sucks when nothing can be done about it. Ohhh I dunno. I'm only a teenager.

Oh, and the guy was a furry raider? Ok.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

I'm 76, and I've tried to live by this philosophy. I'll probably never know how well I've succeeded; that's for others to say after I'm dead.

Fred Patten

Your rating: None

The toughest part is that people have to constantly manage a good reputation because there might be that one moment where I die unexpectedly right after an uncommon argument. First impressions might be lasting impressions, but last impressions are the ones in history books, right?

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.

About the author

Sonious (Tantroo McNally)read storiescontact (login required)

a Kangaroo from Syracroose, NY, interested in video games, current events, politics, philosophy and writing