Saturday, December 17, 2011

Just the facts, Ma'am.

I'm not sure what the deal is here with DP on going after me, Candy and Ann_C other than it's nothing more than another witch hunt over a difference of opinions under the guise of "facts" and which people have more "credibility" (note the underline bold throughout): 
On one hand, we have Amy Cohen Efron, a deaf ASL user who has a Master’s degree and works solely in the Deaf Community. We have MishkaZena, a formerly oral deaf person who now uses ASL fluently. She holds two Master’s degrees and has worked extensively in the Deaf Community. And you have me – a native ASL deaf user, who has a bachelor of science degree and has worked/volunteered extensively in the Deaf Community. All of us three have done some form of scholarly research on the Deaf Community. We’ve read books, professional journal articles, attended classes and professional workshops focusing on various issues in the Deaf Community. We participate and subscribe to an email list serv for deaf academics. And it is very easy to find out MishkaZena and my real names – our real identities are not a secret.
On the other hand, we have Mike M, Ann_C and Candy. Nearly nothing is known about Ann_C. We do not know her real name, nor whether if she holds a college degree. The only thing we know is that she is an oral deaf/severely hard of hearing person who, by her own admission, infrequently uses American Sign Language. She has not mentioned working or volunteering within the Deaf Community, or even having friends who use ASL. I have not seen her discuss reading scholarly books, journal articles or the like, about the Deaf Community. From what I’ve gathered so far from her, the only information Ann_C gets about the Deaf Community, is from the v/blogs.
Mike M is hard of hearing and holds a baccalaureate degree. To my knowledge, he does not work or volunteer in the Deaf Community and primarily uses his voice to communicate. McConnell even wrote once on his blog, which post has apparently been deleted or buried under the reams and reams of posts, that he thought there was something such as too much education. As far as I’ve seen, he has not discussed whether after graduating from Gallaudet, if he has read any scholarly books, journals or the like on the Deaf Community.
And we have Candy. Very little is known about this woman. She appears to be a hard of hearing woman who claims to sign. She has not mentioned whether she works or volunteers in the Deaf Community. Word has it that Candy only has a high school diploma, since she is a college dropout, but we don’t know that for sure, since she has refused to disclose her credentials or her real name. Candy has mentioned that she refuses to read Harlan Lane’s Mask of Benevolence, because she heard it was too biased. Aside from the proclamation of refusal, Candy has not discussed reading any scholarly books, journal articles or the like, on the Deaf Community. And lastly, her claim to expertise regarding the Deaf Community, is supposedly due to her being from a Deaf family and her sister being a high school teacher.
The questions now for all of you to consider are – who do you hold as being more credible on the Deaf Community issues? Whose ideas will you primarily draw from, so you can then help obtain what’s in the best interests for the Deaf Community? Which ideas will you hold as being credible?
What I see here appears to be an attempt to try and out individuals like Ann_C and others under the guise of "just the facts, ma'am" under a topic of who is "more credible." Incredible! All this reminds me like the time when Candy was exposed last year when her real name was revealed which resulted in people who didn't like her contacted her employer in the effort to try and get her into trouble because of a difference of opinions over her blogs fearing the boogeyman was out to destroy their ideology on Deaf culture. Ironically, in Candy's blog she wrote last year "A bully responds to Anti-Bullying Effort!" you can read what DP wrote in the comment section (note the bold):
People need to start filing reports with the police for harassment about these trying to get them fired for no good reason.
It’s one thing to complain about public servants behaving badly, but trying to out private citizens who blog anonymously, then trying to get them fired from their jobs, is just wrong.
Yet in DP's blog she goes after Ann_C, who is a private citizen, and attempted to identify her as much as possible and said,
Nearly nothing is known about Ann_C. We do not know her real name, nor whether if she holds a college degree. The only thing we know is that she is an oral deaf/severely hard of hearing person who, by her own admission, infrequently uses American Sign Language. She has not mentioned working or volunteering within the Deaf Community, or even having friends who use ASL. I have not seen her discuss reading scholarly books, journal articles or the like, about the Deaf Community. From what I’ve gathered so far from her, the only information Ann_C gets about the Deaf Community, is from the v/blogs.
All this has a writing of a dressing down in the effort to compartmentalize each of us into bite size pieces in the attempt to identify who we are and what we have done or not done and whether we fit into their ideological mold. Despite Ann_C's unknown status of who she is (which is not at all important nor necessary to know except by insecure people) as a blogger what DP just did reminded me of time when Ann_C and White Ghost (a frequent commenter) who were once threatened to be outed someday by a commenter in Ann_C's own blog. All this undermining efforts just because of a difference in opinions.

Last year Ann_C wrote "A Moral Compass" where she astutely observed:
V/bloggers, commenters, and readers alike all have seen this monster rear its ugly head online. And it’s an ugly head, no matter what shape it takes on: online personal attacks, cyber-harassment, hijacking of a thread, email threats, organizational bullying, online outting of a v/blogger’s real name, letters written to one’s employer, frivolous lawsuits, real-life threats/stalking, physical confrontations, ad nauseam.
Is it because of the target’s opinion/ view? No, it’s because the attacker dropped his moral compass in the angry desire to hit back at the person he disagreed with.
Pretty ironic considering what has just transpired today. And then you have DP who run by that familiar line again on Candy as someone who is "very little known."
And we have Candy. Very little is known about this woman. She appears to be a hard of hearing woman who claims to sign. She has not mentioned whether she works or volunteers in the Deaf Community. Word has it that Candy only has a high school diploma, since she is a college dropout, but we don’t know that for sure, since she has refused to disclose her credentials or her real name. Candy has mentioned that she refuses to read Harlan Lane’s Mask of Benevolence, because she heard it was too biased. Aside from the proclamation of refusal, Candy has not discussed reading any scholarly books, journal articles or the like, on the Deaf Community. And lastly, her claim to expertise regarding the Deaf Community, is supposedly due to her being from a Deaf family and her sister being a high school teacher.
Excuse me, her name was revealed last year thanks to zealous overbearing morons. But remember, it's "just the fact's, ma'am" when DP said:
All I did was to present facts here, then let the readers draw their own conclusions. If you interpret that as arrogant… well. So be it.
Facts? Or is this really an attempt to undermine and out individuals just because you disagree with their opinions like on what Ann_C opined in Amy Cohen's blog? It's one thing to disagree and state your arguments but it's entirely another thing to try and do this whole dressing down business that has an air of trying to out people of their full identities, and in a tone that would encourage other readers to try do more of the dirty work to do more of the outing business.

And then you have me that DP went after and it was a bit bizarre read, too.
Mike M. is hard of hearing and holds a baccalaureate degree. To my knowledge, he does not work or volunteer in the Deaf Community and primarily uses his voice to communicate. McConnell even wrote once on his blog, which post has apparently been deleted or buried under the reams and reams of posts, that he thought there was something such as too much education. As far as I’ve seen, he has not discussed whether after graduating from Gallaudet, if he has read any scholarly books, journals or the like on the Deaf Community.
For the record, as I have said before in my blogs, I have a B.A. degree in Math from Gallaudet University and a M.S. degree in Geology from University of Idaho. I even got accepted for a PhD study at University of Maryland, too, along with a $5000 NASA  grant with the help of Gallaudet University. Yet I chose a better route than to get a PhD and that was time to start having a career. What's really bizarre is when DP wrote about having too much education claiming I said something like that.
"......even wrote once on his blog that he thought there was something such as too much education." 
Too much education of what? What the heck is that supposed to mean?  What a bunch of rambling nonsense here that doesn't make an ounce of sense. I've always held the philosophy that in life one never stop learning.  And what does it matter on whether I've read any scholarly books or journals about the Deaf community has to do with any of this? Maybe you missed this one?

DP has an opinion about credibility. Her views are her own and not representative of every single person in the Deaf community. People do have valid opinions regarding the Deaf community and such. Heck, I am a representative Gallaudet University. I represent Gallaudet University since I graduated from Gallaudet University. Nothing can take that away from me. If I opine that's not popular or agreeable by other people then that's not really my problem. But it does become a problem when people who disagree with people they don't like and get into this outing business. It simply gets way too personal. And from the looks of things, DP decided to hit back at three people whom she disagreed with in her blog using "just the facts, ma'am" bunk defense in the attempt to out people.

Not cool.

Addendum:  For those who say she doesn't "out" people, well, I beg to differ.


Allegedly?  It's been over a year since she was outed.

Addendum II on what Ann_C said:
I would have been glad to offer my view had DP's post not gone into a witch-hunt but instead asked me directly what I meant. She did get to it finally in a comment after a barbed exchange, but by that time, she'd already written me off. *shrug*
I was expressing the opinion that the video was pandering to deaf issues, and I still stand by that. With the approaching holidays and ten ppl coming to my house, I didn't have time to write a lengthy explanation under ACE's blog.
Btw, pls do read Anony the Great's analysis of that PPT in Candy's Who Let Out the Signage Out blog. It reflected a great deal of what my response was to that PPT.
Have a good holiday.
Ann_C
Happy holidays, ya'll. Btw, PPT = powerpoint.

Addendum III: Ann_C wrote a rebuttal to DP in the comment section below where I am copying and pasting it here:
Since Deaf Pundit closed her comment section under her "A Matter of Credibility" blog and didn't publish my last three comments, I believe my unpublished comments should go on the record:
"Lol, in all the time I've been blogging/commenting online, I've never claimed to be an expert nor have I ever claimed to represent the whole deaf community.
OTOH, a person who claims to be a Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T does have the problem of credibility, because she professes to speak for all of the deaf community.
Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T-ise as "standard operating procedure"?
Ooooooh I'm SCARED-- *trembling hands in the air*
Run for them thar' hills, folks, the Deaf Inquisition is coming!!!!
*********snort*"
The asterisks ran off the first comment page without the word "snort". That's why I sent two more comments, trying to put in the word "snort", which finally showed up on the third comment, ok?

That's it.

Ann_C
And you know what DP said?
Ann_C… I read your last 3 (unpublished) comments and the only thing I have to say to you is that I truly do feel sorry for you.
That means technically Ann_C wrote only one comment while the other two were exactly the same except for the number of asterisks that were too long and she had to re-write it again. What DP said sure made it sound like Ann_C wrote three separate and different scathing comments or something like that.  *smh*

20 comments:

ASL_HeartandSoul said...

good posts on the subject of the HSC signs and the community response to the animated PowerPoint presentation about them. I always admired your ability to (1) see the positive side of things and (2) call people out on their inability to focus on the discussion instead of the person.

Like for example, Deaf Pundit, instead of limiting her opinionss to the signage and what it means about Gallaudet, basically says only: "who the heck are you, and who do you think you are to DARE question this argument so dear to my heart? if you don't have any credentials that I know about, your opinion doesn't mean squat."

geez Louise. I prefer to comment anonymously because I want people to focus on my words instead of who I might be. Trust me, I'm more than qualified to comment on this PPT. How will you know I'm qualified? Read what I wrote. I could say I'm a professor in the Deaf Studies and ASL Department at Gallaudet and have a PhD - would that give me more credibility? I'm not, of course, but just suppose.

As an example of sticking to the subject, I posted on Candy's blog a dissection of the weaknesses in the PPT. I invite your readers to go read it and to comment on the merits of the HSC signage.

Anonymous the Great

Anonymous said...

I cannot read the letters due to the small fonts.

ASL_HeartandSoul said...

to enlarge small fonts, hold down the Ctrl key, and scroll the wheel of your mouse up or down. You can also use the + or - keys of the keyboard (while holding down Ctrl).

Anonymous said...

I know you mean well, but this post appears overly defensive. I didn't read DP's post as an attempt to out, but that might be in the eye of the beholder.

it's nice to have allies in your ideology, but it's not traitorous not to defend them when they've said something nonsensical. When they claim credibility or debunk authority, they have to expect being asked to back it up. That's par for a responsible dialogue.

Candy said...

Anonymous..

If you have Windows, click on VIEW on the top tabs and then click on ZOOM IN. Or, copy and paste it to Word Pad or something similar and highlight it and then change the font.

I'm sure there's other ways to get it to be readable too.

Mike said...

Anony @2:22 PM,

She attempted to out people. Look at my latest addendum. She admitted it.

Nothing about ideology here but about the smarminess in going after people in the effort to expose their identities simply because they disagree with their opinions. Where have you been last year, anony?

Anonymous said...

Anony @2:22 pm

I would have been glad to offer my view had DP's post not gone into a witch-hunt but instead asked me directly what I meant. She did get to it finally in a comment after a barbed exchange, but by that time, she'd already written me off. *shrug*

I was expressing the opinion that the video was pandering to deaf issues, and I still stand by that. With the approaching holidays and ten ppl coming to my house, I didn't have time to write a lengthy explanation under ACE's blog.

Btw, pls do read Anony the Great's analysis of that PPT in Candy's Who Let Out the Signage Out blog. It reflected a great deal of what my response was to that PPT.

Have a good holiday.

Ann_C

Anonymous said...

Since Deaf Pundit closed her comment section under her "A Matter of Credibility" blog and didn't publish my last three comments, I believe my unpublished comments should go on the record:

"Lol, in all the time I've been blogging/commenting online, I've never claimed to be an expert nor have I ever claimed to represent the whole deaf community.

OTOH, a person who claims to be a Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T does have the problem of credibility, because she professes to speak for all of the deaf community.

Deaf E-X-P-E-R-T-ise as "standard operating procedure"?

Ooooooh I'm SCARED-- *trembling hands in the air*
Run for them thar' hills, folks, the Deaf Inquisition is coming!!!!

*********snort*"

The asterisks ran off the first comment page without the word "snort". That's why I sent two more comments, trying to put in the word "snort", which finally showed up on the third comment, ok?

That's it.

Ann_C

Patty Keen said...

Wow, just wow.

I've been away far too long from the v/blogosphere for a very good reason; two very beautiful twin daughters. Gabriella Christina and Cassandra Samantha. I'm a Mommy and just love spending all my time adoring my two babies. It was a complicated pregnancy and a very long c-section but so happy to be blessed with two gloriously beautiful girls that's 4 months old.

Back on topic, everyone has their own opinions granted but not a right to verbally abuse others/twist words to hypocritically mock others. This is where I'm left lost & wondering why some people spend so much time/energy doing this.

A person's identity online is their own business; it is not for us to decide whether he/she has to disclose who they are. Some people seriously needs to mind their own business- big time.

"The humble one learns" and it isn't always those with the degrees that educates others. Quite the opposite; it is usually the ones educated by life teaching those educated by the books.

DeafPundit can do away with her attitude; after all, no one likes a two-faced hypocrite sounding off about what's right or not when she's already in the wrong.

Mike said...

I agree.

theHolism said...

No surprises here when I read about DP. Think about it. She's one angry woman who is sorely disappointed over just about EVERYTHING. Have you ever seen her v/blog over something that she was happy about? Have you ever seen her genuine smile come out? I sure have not. Not very many people have.

And now this... fuming her anger towards others on the subject of 'who is who' and why why she thought they were not qualified or good enough. This part is laughable.

I heard about DP for the first time through Amy C.E. when I was initiating a battle with DBC (Deaf Bilingual Coalition). Initially she (Amy) encouraged me to blog about it and she told me that DP was going to jump onto the bandwagon and help me. Never happened. Later I learned why. She hated men. She hated smart men, especially those who are without college degree. She can't seem to grasp the concept of people's intelligence unless they went to college and took all the same courses she took. Otherwise they are dismissed as 'unqualified', 'wrong' or 'stupid'.

Now, why is she like this? My best guess is she's had some kind of bad experience with men who were a lot smarter than her. I say this because she's been in pursuit of higher education since then and she frowns at men.

Talk about reductionism. She's a classic model of what a reductionist looks like. She's been treading on a very narrow field since I learned about her. So narrow of a field that she'd fall off it frequently. The more she fell off the angrier she seem to become. This much is evident if one really followed her v/blogs for the past four years.

DP, I hope you'll run into this comment because you ought to know that there are professional and unprofessional help available for angry people like yourself.

Mike, good post, as always.

Anonymous said...

Beautifully said, Patty Keen!

"A person's identity online is their own business; it is not for us to decide whether he/she has to disclose who they are. Some people seriously needs to mind their own business - big time."

It is NOT necessary for them to rip other people's identity and personal lives.

By the way, you're a super busy Mom for taking care of your beautiful girls. Make sure you let the girls to enjoyably pick the same clothes without any bickerings! ;-)

Kokonut, you did a gigantic homework! Access Hollywood, Radar Online and TMZ would absolutely love to have some interviews with you! Ha! You're funny.

White Ghost

Candy said...

Attitude is everything.

It's okay if one disagrees with another person regarding the signage on campus, but to go after someone with vengeance by touching on a person's lack of degrees, a person's identity and ahh, Lord have mercy - Native signer status. How did it all become so personal when it all started with signage on campus.

Native signers typically are those whom are born deaf of deaf, but, why bother to go there? That's creating division.

I spend two years at Gallaudet, am considered an Alumni. Have conversed with other Alumnis on topics such as the latest and the responses I get correlates with the latest response by a Gallaudet Alumni on Amy's post.

Why do people spend so much time and energy going after others whom hold different views?

Beats me.

Candy said...

Let's not forget one more thing that really, really takes the cake!

Mike McConnell here, had not blog about the signage, he did not comment at Amy Cohen Effron's post. Nothing. Nada.

Yet, DP went after him. Where did that come from? You decide.

Mike eventually blogged about the signage shortly after DP posted hers, to point out the rationale of Gallaudet placing these signage on campus and the benefits it would reap for the signing community and its culture.

I think it would benefit the deaf community so much if we allow everyone to express their views as is, without attempting to manipulate opinions via attacks.

This reminds me of lawyers who would do anything to win regardless of the true merits of a case. There is a reason why some consider lawyers to be the scum of the earth.

Mike said...

Candy, you're exactly right. Why did she bring me in when I never commented about the signage issue over at Amy's blog? That drew a big question mark over my head.

It's the old argument, if you don't have an advanced degree in a particular subject then you cannot have an opinion. To me, that's a dangerous if not a reckless attempt on controlling the message. Anyone can contribute and have an opinion. Anyone can read up and learn these things and have an opinion. Telling people they cannot participate because they don't have a degree smacks of ego and elitism. People can participate and that's how people learn. Sometimes it's the PhD holder that needs to do the learning. We can still learn from each other. DP is attempting to have her cake and eat it while trying to have a monopoly on a certain issue. Won't work. Never will. The effort to "surround and isolate" certain individuals she disagrees will never work. Doing so will make you look small and petulant. In short, a shoe in one's mouth.

Mike said...

Thank you all for the nice comments and great opinions.

kim said...

I don't know what this latest hullaballoo is about.

I've always had tremendous respect for DPs intellect.

Having said that, I don't personally think one needs to hold a degree to know what is best for them personally.

Whenever I have read Ann_C's blog or yours or Candy's I have always been aware that your opinions were based on your experiences as deaf children who grew up oral, and that unlike some of the others in here, you were happy that you could speak.

It seems to me you all have as much right to your opinions as anyone.

Degree or not.

Candy said...

Kim...

I did not grow up oral. I was raised in a deaf cultured family. You'd be surprised many deaf family do sent their kids to mainstream schools. Besides mainstream, I've gone to a regular public school, deaf residential school and Gallaudet. I think my experience as far as schools goes is quite diverse.

Many in deaf culture speak and are happy they can speak.

Mike said...

I agree, Candy. Many deaf and hh people are satisfied that their speech is intelligible and are able to communicate with their hearing counterparts. That has nothing to with superiority here but rather a skill many were able to develop and hone over the years.

To go the argument route about degrees is nothing more than a red herring.

Anonymous said...

It's so sad it's almost comical at the same time. We can see right through DP's action pretending to be "factual" about the whole process when it's really a hit job while getting the wrong information at the same time. DP needs to learn to "agree to disagree." Or at least have the temerity to leave this puerile emotional latching at the door and not act like little children. DP, yoohoo! Time to get down from your high horse and float down back to Earth.