Cyberbullying Email Group Discussion from 2010

Here's a copy of a cyberbullying email discussion I was in a few years ago. I believe with what has been happening lately warrants the releasing of this group email discussion for public consumption. 

A known deaf person personally invited me and numerous other well known deaf people in the community to contribute in a private email group discussion on cyberbullying.  All names have been changed using initials only. Some initials do not reflect the same first letter of any names (e.g. first name or last name). Some initials do correspond with either a first or last name. Other initials I have purposedly mixed them up. Some style of writings were slightly modified to avoid detection. Signature lines were deleted to avoid identifying who said what. The purpose here is not about the names or who was doing the discussing. The purpose is to show what went on during those email discussions. This email copy represent about 1/3th of the discussions that went on. It's a long piece of email discussion that I cobbled together for your viewing information.

Again, this is not about names.

This is about a discussion on cyberbullying that went on in a group email discussion. I plan to release more of these email discussions at a later time. For what it was worth the discussion eventually broke down with accusations cropping up and misunderstandings. Some opted out early into the discussion.  This is a long email copy with the opportunity to learn what was discussed by various deaf/hh individuals.

Enjoy.


Note: Two double line breaks signifies a new thread. A single double line break separates comments.



===============================
　

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 7:28 PM, “S”wrote:

Greetings all,

Lately the subject of cyber attacks and bullying has come up on Deafread and Aslrocks. As you know, its a subject I feel real strongly about and one that I have ZERO tolerance.

Was thinking, since many of you likewise feel the same way, the only way to end this cycle is by taking a stand to say "stop". Such bullying tactics have lead to many individuals being verbally attacked or trashed on blogs and vlogs. Employers have been contacted, families have been hurt, and self-esteem has been destroyed. Fear gives in, and paranoia sets, to the point some don't even blog or vlog anymore. Ridiculous to see oppressive actions on our own community. Its one thing to disagree with one another, its an entirely other thing to set out on a witchhunt. We could achieve far more working together in harmony, in unity, in the best interest of our future generations of Deaf babies and children.

Hence, this message is a simple request. Many of you are aware, and participated in an article I wrote about Zero Tolerance on Racism, which included A*dism.

I would like to do something similar, and get a quote from you about zero tolerance for cyber-bullying attacks, witchhunts, etc.

If you are real serious about seeing such attacks end, then I hope you are willing to show it by participating. By showing quotes from a diverse wide-variety of folks with different backgrounds, my goal is to show the Community that no matter who we are, no matter what we do, no matter that we may strongly disagree on issues, and/or even actually agree on an issue (here's hoping :) for that matter, our discourses, even heated discussions can be healthy, but cyberbullying is not. I think it behooves us to be responsible to ensure such does not continue to happen and such is why, we need to demonstrate this ourselves -- not separately, but together all on the same "page".

That's the gist of it. I look up to you all as leaders in your own right, the passion you bring to shed more light on various issues to help educate each other. This unified effort is to combat one thing, put an end to cyberbullying.

I hope you agree to send me your thoughts by way of a quote. If you think someone else should be added to join this effort, by all means, include them. The more who do join, the less the divide is amongst us.

I would like to post all of our quotes in one article, perhaps as a guest blogger on one of your sites. Would be neat if someone could also asl the piece once its done. The beauty of doing this is to ensure everyone understands one thing we can all agree on: Zero tolerance for cyber attacks and bullying. Such message can do well to actually strengthen our Deaf Community's ties. Who knows? We don't know until we try.

============================

“L” wrote, 10/06/10

　

There's actually a LOT of history to this effort already. You probably know most of it, but for those who don't, I'd start with: Deaf-Hope The Pact (link).

J, do you have more stories about the already-checkered history of this effort? I remember that X was involved, as was R.

I'm not even sure what ZERO tolerance means, after the fact...

- L.

　

=======================


“P” wrote, 10/06/10:

　

Sounds like a good plan. Article for which reading literature q so I'd know who the audience will be.


==========================================

“B” wrote, 10/06/10:

　

My question is simply this: when does it end? I mean, we've come to a full circle in little more than a year. People will do what they want to do -- no amount of leaders can come together and change that.

It is kind of funny how we are asking them to learn something from this. I think we should ask this of ourselves: what are we learning from this experience??

I think if we keep responding to this, it will only fuel the fire.

As an individual among those who are being attacked (cyberbullied, if you may), I think it is best to let it go.

Someone has to or the cycle will never end.

======================================

J wrote, 10/06/10:

B,

Good food for thought.

Which strategy do we pay the higher price? Which strategy do we risk more?

We know for a fact that in recent weeks, gay youth suicides are on the rise because of cyber-bullying. There is now a call to action within the LGBT community.

Do we remain silent with hopes of not adding fuel to the fire?

Or do we risk seeing Deaf people commit suicide because of hatred/ridicule they experience online?

J.


=================================
=================================

　

S wrote, 10/06/10:

Thank you P! Audience are ppl who read blogs and vlogs. Could be in writing, could be as a video. Whole point is to show a variety of us. L, actually, it started long before the Deafhope pact.


J, and other Deaf womyn and myself posted abt putting an end to cyberbullying on Deaf-CommUNITY blogsite abt 4 or 5yrs ago. Zero tolerance meaning we all take a stand together to state we as individuals do not accept cyber-attacks and bullying. Real simple actually, and in our own words, short n sweet.


S.


===================================

“S” wrote, 10/06/10:

Excellent point J!


===============================
“J” wrote, 7 Oct 2010:



B,

Good food for thought.

Which strategy do we pay the higher price? Which strategy do we risk more?

We know for a fact that in recent weeks, gay youth suicides are on the rise because of cyber-bullying. There is now a call to action within the LGBT community.

Do we remain silent with hopes of not adding fuel to the fire?

Or do we risk seeing Deaf people commit suicide because of hatred/ridicule they experience online?

-J

========================================


“B” wrote, 6 Oct 2010:




P,

My question is simply this: when does it end? I mean, we've come to a full circle in little more than a year. People will do what they want to do -- no amount of leaders can come together and change that.

It is kind of funny how we are asking them to learn something from this. I think we should ask this of ourselves: what are we learning from this experience??

I think if we keep responding to this, it will only fuel the fire.

As an individual among those who are being attacked (cyberbullied, if you may), I think it is best to let it go.

Someone has to or the cycle will never end.
============================================



“P” wrote, Oct 6, 2010:

Sounds like a good plan. Article for which reading literature q so I'd know who the audience will be.


====================================
====================================

　

“L” wrote to “S“, 10/06/10”

Actually, I'm feeling more in line with what B has been saying...

This is structural. It's bigger than us taking a stand. It's a difference between how we each see the force of our own actions against others versus the force of others' actions against us.

It seems related to the whole thing of oppressors not being able to see that they are oppressing, and the oppressed seeing every twitch, with us each having way too much of both oppressor and oppressed inside. Both blinding and blinded...

What I'm seeing out there is, "Yeah? Well, your guy did THIS!" "Oh yeah? Well your other guy did something worse to us!" "Oh yeah?..."

Breaking the cycle means somebody has to be ABLE to say stop and actually HAVE it stop.

At this point, I'm not very hopeful...

- L

==================================
==================================

　

“S” wrote to “L” 10/06/10

In isolation perhaps diff ppl have said stop. But all of us together in one place taking a stand? Nope.


This would be one helluva strong message to our Community. Every effort counts in my opinion. Won't know til we try, eh?
=================================

“L” wrote on 6 Oct 2010 21:12:05 -0700


Actually, I'm feeling more in line with what B has been saying...

This is structural. It's bigger than us taking a stand. It's a difference between how we each see the force of our own actions against others versus the force of others' actions against us.

It seems related to the whole thing of oppressors not being able to see that they are oppressing, and the oppressed seeing every twitch, with us each having way too much of both oppressor and oppressed inside. Both blinding and blinded...

What I'm seeing out there is, "Yeah? Well, your guy did THIS!" "Oh yeah? Well your other guy did something worse to us!" "Oh yeah?..."

Breaking the cycle means somebody has to be ABLE to say stop and actually HAVE it stop.

At this point, I'm not very hopeful...

- L

===================================
===================================

“B” wrote to “S” on 10/06/10”

Then, this is your fight.

All I ask from you is to respect my decision to let this go.

Thank you and good luck.

====================================


“S” wrote on Oct 6, 2010:


In isolation perhaps diff ppl have said stop. But all of us together in one place taking a stand? Nope.


This would be one helluva strong message to our Community. Every effort counts in my opinion. Won't know til we try, eh?

=================================
=================================


“L” wrote to “B” and group, 10/06/10”

“S”

It TAKES all of us to agree, but there IS no "all of us" to agree.

There is a really fundamental dynamic going on here that we're trying to sort of wish away.

B, can you explain it any better?

- L

====================================


“L” wrote on 6 Oct 2010


Actually, I'm feeling more in line with what B has been saying...

This is structural. It's bigger than us taking a stand. It's a difference between how we each see the force of our own actions against others versus the force of others' actions against us.

It seems related to the whole thing of oppressors not being able to see that they are oppressing, and the oppressed seeing every twitch, with us each having way too much of both oppressor and oppressed inside. Both blinding and blinded...

What I'm seeing out there is, "Yeah? Well, your guy did THIS!" "Oh yeah? Well your other guy did something worse to us!" "Oh yeah?..."

Breaking the cycle means somebody has to be ABLE to say stop and actually HAVE it stop.

At this point, I'm not very hopeful...

- L

=======================

“S” wrote on Oct 6, 2010
Excellent point J!

=================

“J” wrote to “B” on im Brune" 7 Oct 2010:


B,

Good food for thought.

Which strategy do we pay the higher price? Which strategy do we risk more?

We know for a fact that in recent weeks, gay youth suicides are on the rise because of cyber-bullying. There is now a call to action within the LGBT community.

Do we remain silent with hopes of not adding fuel to the fire?

Or do we risk seeing Deaf people commit suicide because of hatred/ridicule they experience online?

J


===================================
===================================

“J3” wrote to group on 10/06/10

　

Thanks S for including us. I would like to take some time to read this and all responses. This is not easy one after what we have gone through. Who wants to go through this again? It may be easier just to stay away from cyberworld. But heck no, you are right, we can do better than this.

So which is which... ummm...

===================================
===================================

“P” wrote to group on 10/07/10:

Greetings S et al:

I want to thank you for initiating this collective response. Internet defamation, attacks, harassment via promoting falsehoods and inciting others to attack folks via their workplace, affiliations, and government agencies unjustly is definitely not cool when do you need a quote by?

Also - an ASL and/or international version is very important so if any way i can assist - holler. I understand the temptation to let it drop, to be a turtle. This does not make things go away - it just smolders or emboldens. Too many good voices have gone silent - too many good souls have been hurt. MLK Jr said A man dies when he does not take a stand for that which is just, right and good.

====================================
====================================


“J4” wrote to “J” and “P” 10/07/10:

　

J- I agree with you. S, thank you for starting this important dialogue again


We have nothing to lose by taking a stand together. DeafHope did have a public petition created by a Deaf lawyer to stop Cyberbully together as a community during 2008 at our Tea Party. X was the first to sign it along with Y. Both S and I signed it as well. We did experience backlash for starting the petition but it created a much needed dialogue. It was a proactive statement by us as a community. It was worth it.

Now I think it is time for us to step it up with our personal statements before we lose a Deaf person to suicide. Sure we will experience backlash but we are all in it together to support one another. Prevention instead of reaction goes a long way.

-”J4”

===================================
===================================


“B” wrote to group on 10/07/10:


S and everyone else,

Since my last email asking that my wish to let it go to be respected, I got three emails disagreeing with me, but with serious implications. First, I do not appreciate the emails by J2 and J, I felt they were truly disrespectful to my decision by implying that I may have little or no regard for other Deaf people's lives. It is very insulting.

Consider this perspective: I am respecting the lives of other individuals by not thrusting my opinions of their actions uninvited. It begs the question as to why exactly anyone would want to be travel agents for guilt trips on those who have no desire for these travel packages?

By refusing to respect my decision to let it go rather than to fight it with implications that I contribute to the suicides within our community can and should be construed as an early form of cyberbullying.

As for P, once again I felt disrespected. Rather than agreeing to disagree, my position is now considered "turtle" (which I assume is a thinly veiled analogy to cowardice) and throwing in a quote, by Dr. King no less, saying I'm less of a man than those who wish to fight this? Another example of cyberbullying in its early form.

Sometimes it takes a bigger person to take the brunt of it and let it go than to look for retaliation and being self-righteous.

If you feel it is necessary to bash my decision to let it go, then, please remove my name from this email list.

Once more, thank you and good luck!

-B
===================================================

“S” wrote to group on 10/07/10

　

I would much prefer to see this request done in each site...DR, DVTV, and ASLrocks before final quotes are posted on a blog and done in a video format with ASL and captions. I would feel better knowing that this is an effort to reach out to all and that no one is excluded. Perhaps do request via other deaf forums as well.

Also a message to start fresh, meaning - attempts to rehash is not productive. However, there will be some who might demand apology before being able to start fresh. So we do need to keep that in mind....

I do see why B thinks it might not work, because there will be ppl who feel that they have not reached some sort of closure....

Just sharing my perception...

-S

======================================
======================================

“S” wrote to group on 10/07/10

Also....i am of the opinion that with these request we probably should refrain from using any key words that have cause division.

======================================
======================================

“M” wrote to group on 10/07/10:

　

B,

Your mentioning "implications" of cyberbullying raises the fundamental questions I'm having about this call to action and reflections.

I believe this call by S although noble is too superficial for what is truly needing in this community both in and out of Deaf v/ blogosphere.

What is needing I personally believe as someone who's deeply entrenched in Deaf Cultural and ASL Studies dealing for so many years with all kinds of people both Deaf and hearing is recognizing and respecting the Deaf-centered definitions, social rules, historical ways, and positively potential ways of dealing with crisis. They exist and do work but have been badly battered in the "open" via DeafRead, and yes other "open" Deaf discussion arenas.

Can we begin to discuss cultural as well as personal interpretations of what consists of an insult? What is considered impolite? What is considered insignificant to some but a great insult to one or few? What is considered respect to us or is the same thing considered
hypocrisy to others?

Is pointing out untruths/lies a necessary "insult" or embarrassement that must be avoided? Does it have to do with confidence that comes with a healthy cultural connections with people around us or does it has to do with belittling others or even another culture/language?

Etc etc.

I need to stop now but I know this could become something good. However just quoting and shouting out "stop cyberbullying" won't work. Cuz we seem to have different ideas and ways to deal with it an we haven't even have a collective agreement to cherish and respect our Deafhood, history, Deaf-centered work and fight against a*dism. Etc etc.

========================================

“B” wrote on Oct 7, 2010:

S and everyone else,

Since my last email asking that my wish to let it go to be respected, I got three emails disagreeing with me, but with serious implications. First, I do not appreciate the emails by J2 and J, I felt they were truly disrespectful to my decision by implying that I may have little or no regard for other Deaf people's lives.


It is very insulting.

Consider this perspective: I am respecting the lives of other individuals by not thrusting my opinions of their actions uninvited. It begs the question as to why exactly anyone would want to be travel agents for guilt trips on those who have no desire for these
travel packages?

By refusing to respect my decision to let it go rather than to fight it with implications that I contribute to the suicides within our community can and should be construed as an early form of cyberbullying.

As for P’s email, once again I felt disrespected. Rather than agreeing to disagree, my position is now considered "turtle" (which I assume is a thinly veiled analogy to cowardice) and throwing in a quote, by Dr. King no less, saying I'm less of a man than those who wish to fight this? Another example of cyberbullying in its early form.

Sometimes it takes a bigger person to take the brunt of it and let it go than to look for retaliation and being self-righteous.

If you feel it is necessary to bash my decision to let it go, then, please remove my name from this email list.

Once more, thank you and good luck!

-B

======================================
======================================

　

M2 wrote to “S” on 10/07/10:

As a reader of mostly bloggers with an occasional trip to vlogging sites that were references in the blogs, I have my thoughts that are really irrevelant to this discussion because I do not have a clue as to what happened in 2008. I was not there.

So, I do not know if what I saw constitute "cyberbulling." I think people do it to themselves. I read cyberbulling blogs and do not respond because it is so off base and borders on ludicrous. I can choose to respond and engage in battling words, or I can choose to ignore and be at peace with my decision not to respond. That's where I can understand B's thoughts.

I think we all have to assume responsibility for responding and for engaging in potentially cyberbulling activities when we choose to.

I also think we all ought to be more ready to explain our points of view that could be confusing to others. If I write words that I eventually realize were hurtful, I would apologize quickly.

I don't think our problem is cyberbulling per se, I think the problem is that bloggers/vloggers are not able to look at themselves and acknowledge whether they have had been cyberbullying or wrote harsh words or were confusing readers or what have you.

That happens on both ends of the spectrum. There's no respect for different points of view, and there's no respect for experiences that are so different from the bloggers or vloggers. Does that constitute cyberbullying? I don't know.

It could be ignorance and a hint of arrogance....they think they know better what we need to do.

I think it is a world that invites both awe and repulsion. What do we do about that? I don't know the answer either..

The bloggers and vloggers seem to have ALL of the answers; honestly, I marvel at their knowing everything in life. I wish I knew as much as they do.

M2
========================================

“S” wrote on Oct 7, 2010:

I would much prefer to see this request done in each site...DR, DVTV, and ASLrocks before final quotes are posted on a blog and done in a video format with ASL and captions. I would feel better knowing that this is an effort to reach out to all and that no one is excluded. Perhaps do request via other deaf forums as well.

Also a message to start fresh, meaning - attempts to rehash is not productive. However, there will be some who might demand apology before being able to start fresh. So we do need to keep that in mind....

I do see why B thinks it might not work, because there will be ppl who feel that they have not reached some sort of closure....

Just sharing my perception...

=======================================
=======================================

　

“L” respond to “S” and group on 10/07/10:

Do you think quotes will stop S2? If S2 continues, what are we supposed to do? It only takes one backsliding cyberbully for the whole online community to be thrust back into the same old dynamic!

Can ANY of you get S2 to stop?

I felt that the most recent exposure of what S2's capable of doing was informative to a couple of those who HAD felt that S2 was the "good guy" here, and now realize that he's a BIG part of the problem and needs no longer to have this behavior supported...

J5 has realized that he had crossed the line by calling people names, and has taken steps so that he does not react publicly to taunting such as that S2 did AGAIN yesterday, but that will not be enough going forward if folks like S2 are given a free pass by their friends.

Part of the problem is, as B noted, that cyberbullying is easier to see done TO you than it is to see when YOU are starting to cross over the line, so there needs to be feedback from trusted friends in the backchannel and the ability to actually take HEED of this feedback whenever one of us has crossed the line.

But that takes the "society" part of the "open society". An "open society" that overemphasizes the "open" at the expense of "society" becomes exactly the sort of "Lord of the Flies" situation we have right now. CAN S2's friends tell him when he's crossed the line, and have S2 reign himself in?

- L

========================================
========================================

“X” wrote to group on 10/07/10

The idealist in me

I have always been against cyberbullying and never have condoned or encouraged it. It pains me greatly to see when others respond in a destructive and mean manner. Yes, I would love to see a world where people always treat each other with respect and do not engage in destructive behavior towards others. It would be great if this coordinated response caused many people to see the light and modify their behavior patterns.

The realist in me

Unfortunately, bad behavior always been seen on Internet since the early days. I'm not trying to make an excuse here: it's a simple fact that it's seen everywhere on the Internet across the entire spectrum of users. There are many reasons for this which I won't go into here. It's sufficient to say that people behave very differently on the Internet than in real life. With Internet easier than ever for anyone to access, there are more people present who are not well versed in how to handle negative messages/events.

Even if everyone here today agrees to go ahead with a coordinated response against cyberbullying and other destructive behavior on the Internet, we'll only see a short term effect before it disintegrates back to the old ways. Even if everyone change their behavior tomorrow, it will be inevitable that more people will drawn in and these new people are not attuned to the agreed upon changes. The cycle will repeat itself. In this case, we aren't trying to manage a small group of people, but dealing with a larger population, who don't always follow the same rules, don't know each other personally, don't always get along, respond in many different ways and have their own prejudices and agendas.

The major problems that I have noticed: Not everyone sees cyberbullying in the same light and many times it's a matter of perspective. I've seen too many cases where people who have proclaimed they are against cyberbullying but selectively scold cyberbullies while ignoring/permitting others on their side who engage in the very same behavior.

I think a better approach would be not to aim to eradicate cyberbullying behavior, but to develop effective techniques to deal with these types of behavior on the Internet. Cyberbullying will always exist on the Internet but there are steps to minimize it.

I've tried to model this myself over the years, when I've been attacked numerous times:

1. Always respond in a polite manner, without resorting to degrading comments.
2. Know how to choose the right battles to fight and which ones to avoid.
3. Know when it's best not to respond (most of time, the aim of cyberbullying is to trigger a reaction and while it's very difficult for the person on the receiving end, sometimes the best thing to do is to ignore and not to respond at all.)

Accept the fact that everyone has had different kind of upbringing, were exposed to different things and learned to handle things in different ways. Some of these things they learned or were exposed to may have been positive or were negative. Human nature varies greatly among people. Lastly, it's virtually impossible to change other people's behavior patterns, if they are not open to it.

If there is one thing that I don't like, it's fighting a losing battle. I would prefer to devote my time and energy towards an approach that acknowledges real world factors and will pay off in the end. I may be a bit too pragmatic for my own good but if I see something that will be effective for the long term, I'm all for it.

========================================

B wrote on 10/07/10

　

Be prepared for an heart attack everyone...

I actually agree with M here.

Well said.

=========================================

M wrote on Oct 7, 2010:


B,

Your mentioning "implications" of cyberbullying raises the fundamental
questions I'm having about this call to action and reflections.

I believe this call by S although noble is too superficial for what
is truly needing in this community both in and out of Deaf v/
blogosphere.

What is needing I personally believe as someone who's deeply
entrenched in Deaf Cultural and ASL Studies dealing for so many years
with all kinds of people both Deaf and hearing is recognizing and
respecting the Deaf-centered definitions, social rules, historical
ways, and positively potential ways of dealing with crisis. They exist
and do work but have been badly battered in the "open" via DeafRead,
and yes other "open" Deaf discussion arenas.

Can we begin to discuss cultural as well as personal interpretations
of what consists of an insult? What is considered impolite? What is
considered insignificant to some but a great insult to one or few?
What is considered respect to us or is the same thing considered
hypocrisy to others?

Is pointing out untruths/lies a necessary "insult" or embarrassement
that must be avoided? Does it have to do with confidence that comes
with a healthy cultural connections with people around us or does it
has to do with belittling others or even another culture/language?

Etc etc.

I need to stop now but I know this could become something good.
However just quoting and shouting out "stop cyberbullying" won't work.
Cuz we seem to have different ideas and ways to deal with it an we
haven't even have a collective agreement to cherish and respect our
Deafhood, history, Deaf-centered work and fight against a*dism. Etc etc.
entrenched in Deaf Cultural and ASL Studies dealing for so many years with all kinds of people both Deaf and hearing is recognizing and respecting the Deaf-centered definitions, social rules, historical ways, and positively potential ways of dealing with crisis. They exist and do work but have been badly battered in the "open" via DeafRead, and yes other "open" Deaf discussion arenas.

　

========================================
========================================

J4 wrote to B on 10/07/10:

Hi B. J and I were throwing in our thoughts. I was just having a dialogue. Can u show what I said that was disrespectful to you? This well help me see what I said (unintentionally) to offend you.


======================================
======================================

　

J6 wrote to group on 10/07/10:

I pledge that I will start being diplomatic and start having reasonable dialogue with everyone including K, S, etc. We all need to stop spinning and work towards appropriated solution to the issues.

But will S2 go along with that? Or is his fixation about M, D, B2, DBC, Deafhood is too deep to change for the better?

B, I apologize for my insensitive attitude that I demonstrated to you on your blog two years ago and hope you will forgive me and whenever we meet anywhere in the country, I would like to shake hands to show my secure desire to be friends with you.

J6


=======================================
=======================================

“S” wrote to J6, B, P, K and to group on 10/07/10:

Thank you all for joining this important dialogue. Everyone’s input is respected, valued and appreciated. B, if by saying you don’t want to participate, then I can certainly remove you from this list. I was hoping that although you wish to let it go, you would want to be a part of the discussion. If not, just let me know, thank you.

The points J, M, and K have made are valid. There will always be a “R” or a “S2”. It’s what we choose to do with such comments or cyber-attacks/bullying that is important. From my view, I see a pattern where this issue surfaces almost annually. The educating never stops. Like racism, it rears its ugly head from time to time. Take for example when Obama was elected President, folks thought racism was finally going to end. We know from media publications, racist remarks by the infamous Tea Party about Obama, that this is not true. However, what we do see growing, is a stronger force of people united taking a stand each time it comes up. That is what this is about. Each time it comes up, we grow in numbers to take a stronger stand against cyber attacks and bullying. This doesn’t just mean what happens on the blogs or vlogs, and no matter what culture you belong to, it’s clear bullying attacks when behind scenes where the bullying happens with people sending email threats, calling employers to “squeal” on a person, many of you have experienced this yourselves. This is not acceptable.

P, I appreciate your offer to help. One idea I was toying with, but I don’t have the means to put it together, was to have this be an “infomercial” of the different folks here either defining what it means, or signing stop, or a written quote flashed on the screen – to make it all under 4 mins of course. Basically to make it so that it is “not cool” to attack or bully, so that it becomes a popular thing way to think. That’s what commercials do, shape the way the public should think about an issue or an item. Hope this makes sense. “Next year” we may have a different idea when it comes up again. Like I said, educating folks is an on-going process, it never ends, nor should we ignore it either. I think what I have seen is different folks speaking up on blogs and vlogs. Which is a good thing and needs to continue. But all of us from different backgrounds, together sharing and supporting one message, no.

Thanks to those of you who are considering working on this collectively. May the dialogue continue.....


======================================
======================================

　

“S3” wrote on 10/07/10:

I like the idea of infomercials. keep things simple....people remember simple messages.


======================================================

　

P wrote on 10/07/10

Hi all

Ah my heart is still ticking B - no heart attack. Just an open heart and marveling at this dialogue. Thank you all. I do want to take a minute to apologize to you B if my quoting MLK made you feel I was targeting you. My intent was very far removed from that. This was my intent and desire:

MLK saying... A man dies when he does not stand for that which is right just and good. "Man" was the dominant language of the time. What he meant was a HUMAN - we as a PEOPLE - when we look the other way we cause more harm than good. It is not a question of manhood - or cowardice as MLK framed it

It is a question of doing right and a plea for our souls so there be no
death of the spirit. Too many good folks have been silent. I fully respect what ever choice you choose B. I am speaking to us as a commUNITY and I understand that folks are at different places and stages and have different needs at this time. I’m sorry you felt I was targeting you.

Feel free to disagree with the position without accusing me of something I did not do. I just stated my values and principles - I do accept that many folks hold different values and truths and opinions.

Please know that if I wanna say something directly to you - I will totally honor your spirit and say it directly. I wont play games - there are no veils coming from these quarters.

re: turtle - I was responding more to J3's comment: " It may be easier
just to stay away from cyberworld." But then he quickly followed it with: "But heck no, you are right, we can do better than this."

My purpose of mentioning the turtle - is because it is a mighty temptation for me too.

M wrote:
“Can we begin to discuss cultural as well as personal interpretations of what consists of an insult? What is considered impolite? What is considered insignificant to some but a great insult to one or few? What is considered respect to us or is the same thing considered hypocrisy to others?

Is pointing out untruths/lies a necessary "insult" or embarrassement that must be avoided? Does it have to do with confidence that comes with a healthy cultural connections with people around us or does it has to do with belittling others or even another culture/language?

These are very important questions and maybe the first step in this dialogue is to have folks within this listing share what they see to be the answers to these questions. This may lay the good groundwork for something much better to come forth.


========================================
========================================

J2 wrote on 10/07/10

At the risk of sounding too brash:

I would like to point out two things:

1) I haven't seen anyone who thinks or has said that cyberbullying is OK or is a cool thing to do. Everyone is against it. The problem is their own perception that what they are doing doesn't count as cyberbullying.

2) This similar approach has been tried before with the Pact. It's obvious by now that it has failed and didn't have the desired effect in the long term. Why repeat something similar? It won't work. Find a different approach.

=======================================
=======================================
　

T wrote to group on 10/07/10:

　
S...thanks for initiating this dialogue. I especially appreciate the diversity of people you included in this email:) I would love to see a stop to the targeting of organizations, members of organizations, and individual naming and name calling. I think we have so much to gain by being respectful of each other. That includes other people's opinions even if they are different from our own. I am sorry that B felt put down for his opinion. I don't think that was the intention of anyone but more that this is a forum to either want to be involved in this project or not. So B...please do stay involved in this discussion.. and I do want to thank you for bringing out the truth on Deafread to the facts of the letter writing to employers. That was very brave of you and honorable.

I would love to see guidelines enforced and some oversight to stop witch hunts and harassment which are all forms of bullying but taken to the extreme of riding the line of slander and libel. Vendettas to destroy people and organizations should be recognized and eliminated on aggregators. There is a difference between freedom of speech and terrorism. Simply not accepting those kinds of vlogs and blogs eliminate the chances an aggregator becoming infested by people that simply have agendas to harm others because they feel they have been slighted or owed apologies.

As a hearing parent, I am sadden at some of the blogs I read that literally make the D/d people and organizations look horrible, that spread untruths, and basically turn hearing parents who need information desperately away from D/d people, Deaf communities, and the Deaf blogosphere. Because of all the wonderful D/d people who have influenced our family's lives, I am grateful and hopeful through today's technology that other hearing families can make connections they need to be supported. Many times this happens through blogs and vlogs. And we all know that when our D/d children feel supported and accepted, the possibilities are endless for them.

I think all of you have made some very good suggestions and through this dialogue, I hope that we can all come to some kind of consensus on how is the best way to start awareness building of cyberbullying and how to improve the aggregator systems so that people feel safe again participating in today's cyberworld.

I am happy to participate in this...

T

=====================================
　

J wrote on 10/07/10

J2:
I'm glad u pointed that out.
What would be an effective approach to take?
I think we should consider various strategies before settling on one.


======================================

J3 wrote on 7 Oct 2010


At the risk of sounding too brash:

I would like to point out two things:

1) I haven't seen anyone who thinks or has said that cyberbullying is OK or is a cool thing to do. Everyone is against it. The problem is their own perception that what they are doing doesn't count as cyberbullying.

2) This similar approach has been tried before with the Pact. It's obvious by now that it has failed and didn't have the desired effect in the long term. Why repeat something similar? It won't work. Find a different approach.

===================================


“S” wrote on Oct 7, 2010:

Thank you all for joining this important dialogue. Everyone’s input is respected, valued and appreciated. B, if by saying you don’t want to participate, then I can certainly remove you from this list. I was hoping that although you wish to let it go, you would want to be a part of the discussion. If not, just let me know, thank you.

The points J3, M, and K have made are valid. There will always be a “R” or a “S3”. It’s what we choose to do with such comments or cyber-attacks/bullying that is important. From my view, I see a pattern where this issue surfaces almost annually. The educating never stops. Like racism, it rears its ugly head from time to time. Take for example when Obama was elected President, folks thought racism was finally going to end. We know from media publications, racist remarks by the infamous Tea Party about Obama, that this is not true. However, what we do see growing, is a stronger force of people united taking a stand each time it comes up. That is what this is about. Each time it comes up, we grow in numbers to take a stronger stand against cyber attacks and bullying. This doesn’t just mean what happens on the blogs or vlogs, and no matter what culture you belong to, it’s clear bullying attacks when behind scenes where the bullying happens with people sending email threats, calling employers to “squeal” on a person, many of you have experienced this yourselves. This is not acceptable.

P, I appreciate your offer to help. One idea I was toying with, but I don’t have the means to put it together, was to have this be an “infomercial” of the different folks here either defining what it means, or signing stop, or a written quote flashed on the screen – to make it all under 4 mins of course. Basically to make it so that it is “not cool” to attack or bully, so that it becomes a popular thing way to think. That’s what commercials do, shape the way the public should think about an issue or an item. Hope this makes sense. “Next year” we may have a different idea when it comes up again. Like I said, educating folks is an on-going process, it never ends, nor should we ignore it either. I think what I have seen is different folks speaking up on blogs and vlogs. Which is a good thing and needs to continue. But all of us from different backgrounds, together sharing and supporting one message, no.

Thanks to those of you who are considering working on this collectively. May the dialogue continue.....


===============================

J5 wrote on 07 Oct 2010

I pledge that I will start being diplomatic and start having reasonable dialogue with everyone including X, Y, etc.

We all need to stop spinning and work towards appropriated solution to the issues.

But will S3 go along with that? Or is his fixation about M, XX, Y, DBC, Deafhood is too deep to change for the better?

B, I apologize for my insensitive attitude that I demonstrated to you on your blog two years ago and hope you will forgive me and whenever we meet anywhere in the country, I would like to shake hands to show my secure desire to be friends with you.
together all on the same "page".


========================================

Naturally so...

A certain person who used to be a moderator in one forum recently claimed that I made a slanderous remark against a new forum in a recent blog I did. A claim that is certainly unfounded. The problem is that I've always supported competition as I've said before elsewhere. If people think they can build a better mouse trap (i.e.better product, services, etc), go for it. This is exactly how it happened between Deafread and Deaf Village. Both are blog aggregator websites where Deaf Village was borne out of its own need (and frustration) on a matter of principle and ideology in 2008 to build it's own blog aggregator site instead of relying on Deafread's blog aggregator site. In fact, I was one original Deaf Village staff who helped get Deaf Village off the ground in 2008. And yet I am a blog contributor to both Deafread and Deaf Village blog aggregator sites.

The same story goes between DeafvideoTV, Deafcube and ASLrocks.net (now defunct) which are (or were as for ASLrocks) video blog aggregator websites but Deafcube (and ASLrocks) was, too, born out of its own need (and frustration) on a matter of principle and ideology recently to build it's own video blog aggregator site. So, nothing is new under the sun when Naturally Deaf came about a few weeks ago borne out of its own need (and frustration) and as a matter of principle and ideology against All Deaf to build it's own forum.

People are free to make their choices when it comes to competition over the internet and that's what makes America great. There are now more choices to chose from for deaf and hard of hearing people, late deafened, culturally deaf, cochlear implant wearers, CODA, hearing parents of deaf/hh children and people who are simply curious or interested about deafness issues. I've already told a few people about the new forum site to check it out yet the snarkiness and sniggering on congratulating me for helping generate traffic to their new forum continues as I speak which certainly tells the story. 

As I have said before to the new moderator, good luck on the new endeavor and duty as a moderator. I mean it.

Now, back to my blog.

It's understandable that some people would miss my warning that I'd play the devil's advocate (I made it abundantly clear in the beginning) in one of my recent blog.  Long story short, I explained that some people might think of the phrase "naturally deaf" as applied to people would find it odd. Much the same questioning could be said for "naturally blind" and so on. But if people actually think I did make a slanderous statement against the new forum in my recent blog then show exactly where I made that slander. Otherwise it'd be smart to retract that accusation when it was never true in the first place which, ironically so, is the very definition of a slander. Go figure. Yet, I have my own opinions and beliefs regarding forums, blog and vlog aggregator sites. I have the right to express them as I see fit. Even when I believe some favoritism and bias have played a role on influencing moderators. There is no such thing as a bias-free moderator, naturally so. And in retrospect, I'd be wary of joining a deaf discussion forum with that kind of rampant bias and favoritism.

Point of View

Let's get this straight. No one is saying that having different point of views is censorship. As in the case for Deafread, people have been and are trying to force the owner of Deafread through intimidation, protests, slandering, harassing, and conjuring up myths about the owner of Deafread, Tayler Mayer, in order to get him to acquiesce and run an aggregator site that accept only Deaf POV videos and institute a so-called better "R-List." Thus pushing the practice of censoring to the extreme.

What is "censor"?

cen·sor
noun
1. an official who examines books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds.

In fact, Tayler and his moderators do censor what's allowed in Deafread since there are certain requirements to be met in order for a blog or a link to be posted in Deafread. But the big irony is that because of Deafread there are loads of POVs from all kinds of people who are deaf, hard of hearing, late-deafened, culturally deaf, CODAs, cochlear implant wearers, signers and non-signers alike, those who prefer to speak and listen, and hearing parents of deaf/hh kids.

Tayler Mayer made it clear that he does not want to censor Deafread by restricting it even further and have it accept Deaf POVs only but rather have Deaf, deaf, hard of hearing and hearing POVs instead.

One central reason for developing DeafRead is that Jared and I wanted to empower the deaf community; we wanted to allow everyone a voice, a place where people could speak out.

What is censorship?

the actions or practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised repressively

So what Don and others are advocating? More censorship and control through force and intimidation against the owner of Deafread, and get him to capitulate at all cost.

If Don and others want to create their own aggregator site that accepts only Deaf POVs they are more than welcomed to create an alternative aggregator site that reflect their own policies, rules and ideals. Deaf Village did the same thing by breaking away from Deafread to create its own blog aggregator site. A place to provide aggregated and filtered online content that reflects a spirit of inclusion, collaboration and partnership among the diverse members of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Community.  They didn't whine and moan for 3 or 4 years when they disagreed with Deafread's actions or policies. They up and left and created their own blog aggregator site in a matter of months which is now in its 4th year.

There's a similar situation for vlogs as well. You have DVTV for signers which is an aggregator site for vlogs via YouTube. At one time people got upset with Tayler Mayer's (DVTV) policy regarding the ground rules on accepting vlogs and decided to create their own vlog aggregator site and the first one was ASLrocks. That attempt failed spectacularly and ASLrocks didn't even last for one year probably due to the rampant cyberbullying that went on.  Next came along Deafcube and it is still going.

Instead of complaining, go out create your own if you're not happy with Deafread. Using the strategy to try and bully Tayler Mayer into changing will not work. That tactic has obviously failed. It's better to hear from all sides than to be fed with only one viewpoint all the time.

Had enough oranges?

Incestuous Relationships in the YouTube Deaf community?

And so I sat and observed what some people have said about the recent brouhaha in DVTV land where vloggers went so far as to issue threats and/or violated the rules in DVTV earning them a quick ban. Issuing threats are not cool. Throwing a temper tantrum while on the floor isn't cool, either.  This is like witnessing another round of "Deaf Identity Gone Wild" but only this time people are aiming their badly focused sight on Tayler instead, the owner of DVTV. 

The role of bloodlines and pedigree in defining Deafness, along with the relatively small number of deaf people in the United States to begin with, helps explain the unusually active and even incestuous part that Gallaudet alumni, deaf parents, and even supposedly neutral organizations such as the National Association of the Deaf played in the battle against Fernandes.

Except this battle isn't about Fernandes but about Tayler who is at the helm of his own DVTV ship but he's no Captain Bligh. He's fair and makes sure that DVTV is "more safe" than YouTube because blocking against individual vloggers has never been easier.  It's not a right to vlog on DVTV but a privilege and must follow DVTV's R-List of rules. Maybe Tayler isn't quite "Deaf enough" to some of the culturally deaf people's taste because he isn't "radical" enough? Hence, the continuing protestations?

Deaf people have increasingly used YouTube to the point where their actions have morphed into this mutant, politically incestuous, illegitimate entity, ad hoc type of group that has increasingly become more "clannish" and even "cultish" in some ways. In other words, they've increasingly become the epitome of what online bullying looks like in order to get what they want as a group that matches their agenda.  It has even gotten to the point where people have condoned (e.g. keeping silent about it) making online threats to other people as long as they think if it benefits their agenda.

Not cool, and pretty sick, too. But you won't hear that condemnation from some leaders when it comes to online threats.  It can be done directly by making email/online threats or indirectly as in the case of the "neo-nazi" tattoo lie hoping it will stick and cause the person to lose his job which pretty much defines a "hate speech" in its own right. And the leaders were once again, silent.

So we ask these questions.

How bad is this particular incestuous lot in the YouTube Deaf community? Is it real or imagined? What is the connection? How many are we talking about? How deep does it go? Or is this a case of a massive misunderstanding taking place? Has "Deaf power" run amok amongst the leaders and people of that community? Is the wearing of hoods a manifestation of what hatred looks like?  The people who sent threatening emails to Tayler, do they represent the Deaf community at large?

The Suckees and the Suckers....

I'm thinking about all the whiners out there who are unable to debate or argue intelligently and knowing when to disagree tactfully so. But instead they throw temper tantrums like a 6 year old kid because their "feelings" were hurt or felt "insulted" and how they demand that the offending person be removed for having an opinion that targeted no specific person. In life, how are they going to learn to suck it up once in a while? Of course, what I'm referring to is the whole DVTV debacle (not Tayler's but the whiners' own). For those who learn to "suck it up" when it comes to vloggers they find "offending" they know what to do by either ignoring the vlogger, put a block on him/her, or able to learn to control their emotions by not getting unnecessarily upset over it. They're called "Suckees." For those who refuse to put a block on the offending person in DVTV or refuse to ignore vlogs they don't like, they're called "Suckers." Why? Well, they are suckers for drama and would rather be on the sucker end of the joke. Weak-minded and unable to resist the need to have drama in their lives, and so they are the suckers.

People can disagree tactfully by voicing their displeasure or disagreement in a reasonable manner. I have no problems when it comes to disagreeing, even strongly, and be respectful about it. But to put on a drama show, stage protests, walk-outs, act intimidating in front of the camera, crying and demanding that the offending person be somehow banned, create vlogs specifically to harass, mock, show extreme hate, name calling, and so on against a person or vlogger they do not like for whatever reasons make them....Suckers. Because once they go down that path then you know they are unable to reasonable debate or argue effectively on why they disagree with that offending person's point of view or opinons. They are unable to agree to disagree and move on. They MUST have drama.

Suckees know what to do, say and act. They refuse to be suckers, and would rather be on the "suckees" end and not on not be "suckers." They learn how to suck it up and not let emotions cloud their judgements. They try and see from other people's point of views and perspectives. They try and see it objectively rather than emotionally. Suckers are unable to debate or argue their case cohesively and clearly, and are perhaps temporarily "crippled" mentally-wise. They are emotionally "crippled" in their own pool of thoughts on hate, contempt, derision, and anger. They are unable to be reasoned with, perhaps on a temporary basis, and how they are unable to objectively argue. In short, they throw themselves on the floor and do these temper tantrums like a 6 year old kid who can't get what he wants and demand that Mommy or Daddy do something about it to make him happy. You need to stop running to Tayler Mayer for every little vlogs that you don't like. Making a personal attack does not replace an effective, well thought out argument.Throwing a temper tantrum doesn't help, either.

And so, in the case of Barry (The Holism) in DVTV, you have the weak-minded group of people who cannot even use the basic common sense to use DVTV's block feature to block out any vloggers they do not like. If not DVTV but in YouTube, they are unable to avoid watching vloggers they don't like. But I suspect that many refuse to block certain people or through act of will power learn not to watch certain vloggers they do not like because many are simply addicted to drama. They want something to complain and whine about. Tayler Mayer is not your Mommy or Daddy for you to cry and run to. If you don't like certain vloggers in DVTV you can easily block that vlogger. Easy! Tayler Mayer already explained recently on how to do that by spoon feeding you that information. But for your own sake and sanity, it's better to avoid watching any vlogger that you don't like in the first place. Use your willpower to make sure of that and get that peace of mind.

I'm telling you. Suckers are addicted to dramas. They want that. They *THRIVE* on that. Suckees know better than to let emotion get the best of them. DVTV is an open book for the world to see and what do you think they see once they take a look at vloggers in DVTV ? A bunch of Suckers? Or a bunch of Suckees? 

Are you a sucker? Probably so. Prove me wrong.

Having a fit over "Deaf Trash"

After seeing Barry's video "Deaf Trash" I can't help but think the people who are upset are just probably are so laser-focused on the words "deaf trash" rather than on what Barry discussed in his video. Much the same way on how some tended to focus on the words "ASL failed" rather than the discussion behind it and instead got all upset over those two words.

Now, I'm just thinking here. Bear with me.

Are some people upset because they think they are indeed "deaf trash" in their own minds and felt they were somehow "targeted"?  If they're confident about themselves then there would be no reason to get upset over those words since it would have no bearing on them or of no importance. Perhaps this is a case of people who are simply "context-impaired"?  Barry targeted no one single individual in that video and yet what did some some people do? The run over to Tayler Mayer, the owner of DVTV, and cry about Barry's latest video and demand that he be banned despite the fact that Barry broke no rules in DVTV.  Tayler Mayer knows this. In fact, Tayler had to resort to a video explaining again that members of DVTV have the power to block anyone they want and that DVTV is actually better in terms of being "safer" than YouTube. All this goes to show that Barry has not violated any of DVTV's R-list. Feeling hurt or upset when you weren't personally targeted doesn't count. People have the option to block Barry or anybody else in DVTV. It's easy.

Here's the conundrum.

If people claim to have no interest in Barry's videos then why do they continue to watch his videos on DVTV and continue to complain to Tayler Mayer? Makes no sense. I've a mind that they simply like to whine and complain all the time for whatever reason is simply beyond me.

Barry is a deaf person, he knows that and certainly I understood completely the context on what Barry said, for example, about "deafless" which was simply to mock all the new invented words out there such as the a-wordism.  Words like that are simply not in the dictionary. It was also to point out that the word "deaf" is not all that overly important, either. Much the same way he explained in context and concept in a video on the word "ageless" of an 80 year old man still actively hiking, biking, running or swimming. The 80 year old man knows he's old but that doesn't stop him. Same way with "deafless." Though he does admit he's deaf, too.  Get it? Many don't.

Yet Barry's videos gets the number one spot on the average number of views to each of his videos (60 videos) with OhBuckaroo (24 videos), Barry's son, coming in a 2nd place. All that makes me wonder about the people who don't like Barry and his videos do not make the effort to simply block him on DVTV.  Sure, there will be disagreements. That is to be expected. People can disagree and state their arguments in a good way. Nothing wrong with that. That's what makes debating great.  But run over to Tayler Mayer to complain about Barry's videos doesn't make it all very "adult like." Staging an effort to "walk out" of DVTV over Barry's videos isn't a good thing either but they're free to do what they want in voicing their displeasure. But I think it's rather a dumb thing to do when one can always use DVTV's block feature. The first walk out was a dismal failure. That didn't stop DVTV from its goal on making it as "safe" as possible for all members.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I do understand. The problem here is that members continue to watch in DVTV knowing they have the full power to block out vloggers for whatever reasons instead of demanding the owner of DVTV to ban certain vloggers they don't like. They are an adult. They need to act like one and use the block feature in DVTV.

Oh, btw, happy 4th birthday DVTV. It all began four years ago on May 7th. It is still running strong despite to continual whining.

Barry continues to make a big impact on the deaf community. His message continues to reach out even to the hearing community and the people who don't know sign or know very little with the help of his subtitling efforts in YouTube. He continues to evolve as a person who is a part of the deaf and hard of hearing community, and yes, even the culturally deaf community as well. Love him or hate him, he belong to no one.  His journey is his own personal journey and that no one can tell him what he can or cannot do.

Making threats to DVTV

I happened to take a quick peek at DVTV to see what's up and came across KissASL's vlog about canceling a dance contest due to getting several emails threatening to "damage DVTV" if she goes ahead with the contest of hers. This is example of bullying in action. Whoever sent those emails is a friggin' moron and a coward who think the answer is to issue threats to the person and to ruin or damage DVTV just because he or she doesn't agree with what she's doing. I hope whoever sent those emails get caught for sending threatening materials to her and against DVTV. It doesn't matter who or what the issue is, it is simply inexcusable to write such an email letter to anybody on the matter of disagreements by making threats. This is almost just as bad for a deaf person to wish the death of a deaf father's baby son in the hope that he falls on the baby killing the infant (yes, this actually happened). Whatever. Such threats or wishes of harm or damage are inexcusable. Such actions are for the limp, weak minded people who can't handle such a simple concept like agreeing to disagree. Making threats over a dance contest on DVTV? We definitely have morons in our midst who have the inability to think constructively.

Damn the ASL, Full speed ahead!

If you know a thing about naval history or two you'd probably might recognize this slightly changed phrase "Damn the ASL, Full speed ahead!" as borrowed from one of the famous and well known naval quotes. And if you look at the bolded italics below it's exactly what I've been doing lately as seen in my latest vlog in response to a deaf professor's rant against a deaf female blogger as I continue to steam full speed ahead on being who I am regardless of the "mines" around me.

"Damn the torpedoes, Full speed ahead!"

Admiral David Glasgow Farragut (1801-1870). Aboard Hartford, Farragut entered Mobile Bay, Alabama, 5 August 1864, in two columns, with armored monitors leading and a fleet of wooden ships following. When the lead monitor Tecumseh was demolished by a mine, the wooden ship Brooklyn stopped, and the line drifted in confusion toward Fort Morgan. As disaster seemed imminent, Farragut gave the orders embodied by these famous words. He swung his own ship clear and headed across the mines, which failed to explode. The fleet followed and anchored above the forts, which, now isolated, surrendered one by one. The torpedoes to which Farragut and his contemporaries referred would today be described as tethered mines.

[Hearn, Chester G. Admiral David Glasgow Farragut: The Civil War Years. (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1988): 263-265. According to the book by Admiral Farragut's son, The Life of David Glasgow Farragut, First Admiral of the United States Navy, (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1879), pages 416-417, Admiral Farragut said "Damn the torpedoes! Four bells! Captain Crayton, go ahead! Joucett, full speed!"]

I've not changed in who I am. I have used my voice in the past at Gallaudet University's blog/vlog conference and I will continue to do so into the future whether it'd be on YouTube, my blog or in DVTV.  And "Damn the ASL" as I continue to sign in PSE or ASL or a mix of both. No shame in how I communicate. I acknowledge my own English language upbringing, my use of my voice, my hearing aid, and even my way of signing. So, full speed ahead! Those mines are duds!

My discussion in DVTV continues on the issues between PSE and ASL. It's not that I'm discounting ASL but rather questioning the fact whether deaf/hh people who know signing actually sign in PSE rather than in purely in ASL.  And seeing the irony of how some people proclaim to be ASL signers but sign rather obviously in a PSE or PSE/ASL format instead. There is no shame in signing and acknowledging the use of PSE over ASL. There are people who have a preference and reason to sign in PSE rather than ASL and vice versa. No shame in that. Just as there is no shame for me to use my voice in expressing my opinions in YouTube provided that I includes captions so that my videos are accessible to most people, deaf or not.

DVTV will allow my recent video to stay on and I'm thankful to Tayler for allowing that. I have not broken any rules and according to the R-List the goal is for a full and healthy discourse that are accessible for deaf and hard of hearing community users.

We at DeafVIDEO.TV are committed to increasing the accessibility of information for Deaf and Hard of Hearing community users and look forward to a positive and thriving exchange of views in a respectful and safe manner.

Tayler has been doing the right thing in DVTV on helping to try and keep dialogues in a respectful and safe manner.

Polls results: Cyberbullying problem on ASLrocks vs DVTV - which is worse?

Interesting polls results so far on the cyberbullying issue in ASLrocks and DVTV. I asked a question if cyberbullying a problem in ASLrocks and DVTV. Was the cyberbullying issue a serious one? Not really that bad ? Little or no cyberbullying? Or that cyberbullying simply does not exist? Both polls had a total of 77 votes so far and so it's not really a good sample or indicative of the true overall feeling about those sites. However, that being said, the poll results do provide a window of what people are saying.

Results for ASLrocks on a poll asking whether cyberbullying is problem over there:

- 70% of the votes selected "Yes, very serious."
- 12% of the votes selected "Yes, but not that bad."
- 10% of the votes selected "No, there is little or no cyberbullying.
- 8% of the votes selected "No, cyberbullying does not exist on ASLrocks" which garnered 6 votes.

Results for DVTV on a poll asking whether cyberbullying is a problem over there:

- 23% of the votes selected "Yes, very serious."
- 21% of the votes selected "Yes, but not that bad."
- 43% of the votes selected "No, there is little or no cyberbullying.
- 13% of the votes selected "No, cyberbullying does not exist on ASLrocks" which garnered 10 votes.

Perhaps the results for ASLrocks aren't a surprise since Convo Relay recently pulled their ads from ASLrocks (see here and here). After that happened ASLrocks reverted back to a members-only viewing site rather than continue to be an open and transparent site to all viewers, members and non-members alike. DVTV continues to be an open and transparent site.

Polls are still open for those who haven't voted. Remember, these polls are not scientific polls and results should be taken with a grain of salt. Nonetheless, results are interesting so far.

Poll: Cyberbullying a problem on ASLrocks or DVTV?

Remember, this is not a scientific poll.

Hypocrisy on the DR boycott and "avdism"?

About a year ago people decided to boycott Deafread because of Tayler's refusal to put the "A"-word in the Deafread guideline as grounds for not accepting a blog.

Because I lack the experience, knowledge and authority, I refuse to embed the term “au****” into the guidelines. Doing so would have significant impact on the deaf community and would not be able to bear the responsibility of forcing the wrong interpretation upon the community. Until there is greater consensus on “au****”, therefore having less room for it to be abused, the guidelines will protect DeafRead by the “excessive negativity” clause and DeafVIDEO.TV by the harassment rule. Following this fiasco in which au**** was exposed to be both widely misunderstood and abused, I retracted my committment to Patti to add it to the guidelines. As Patti and I agreed more recently, I will instead work with the DeafRead team to incorporate a broader term that will offer tighter protection than that of the “excessive negativity” clause.

Note that I am censoring part of the "a" word in Tayler's comment in the above for my own personal reason. You can read here on why. I could've replaced it with "avdism" though but either way I'm making this known for you readers.

And because of Tayler's refusal to include such a word in the Deafread guidelines numerous Deaf bloggers decided to boycott Deafread and not have their blogs show up on Deafread. One of the blogger is Dr DonG where he explained why he boycotted Deafread.

I have long since been speaking against au****. I have taken a stand against a****. I believe that if you “talk the talk”, you must “walk the walk”. Au**** hurts, and it hurts worse when it comes from one of our own. But it hurts worst when one of our own allows it AND profits from it.

That is the reason that I feel I can no longer be involved in DVTV, if au**** is allowed to continue. I cannot let someone directly profit from au****. It’s bad enough when Hearing people, like at Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, profit from au****, but we Deaf should not allow it, we should not accept it.

So, people boycotted Deafread because of the "rampant" avdism seen in the aggregator list linking to blogs with attidudes of "avdism"? Right? What about Deaf Village's aggregator site, too? Now, isn't avdism seen in majority of DV's submissions include lots of stuff about how wonderful hearing and speaking is for children, CIs and their marvelous results, all technically defined as the "A"-word in all its mutations  If so then why is DonG's website listed on Deaf Village's aggregator site as seen on DV's blog contributors list? And yet the most recent submission of DonG's in DV was on September 10, 2010 with a total of 24 submissions ever since he boycotted DR over a year ago over a single word.

Regardless, I still think it's rather a petty and trivial thing to boycott over a word when Tayler made clear on why he is unable to institute such a word into Deafread's guidelines.

Mystery vlog at ASLrocks

I was looking for a specific video during one of my research that led me to ASLrocks.net and noticed one vlog and the ensuing comments afterwards discussing about a mystery vlog "Trust your leaders about AB 2072? " that somehow showed up on ASLrocks.net. It appears to have been perpetrated by an imposter or imposters because no screen name appeared with that video. Despite Seesmic video beeing down at the time people were reponding by typing in their comments. And if you missed seeing that missing vlog here's a Google cache of that mystery vlog on ASLnet.rocks.

Now, it's not the mystery vlog that caught my eye but the comments elsewhere in other vlogs about the author of the vlog "Trust your leaders about AB 2072?".  I can't say I'm surprised by some of the vitriol but that site certainly has a feel of "members only club mentality" where you are judged by your opinions (e.g. on avdism, "deafhood," Deaf culture, etc) rather than embracing a more open and honest forum discussion for anyone who signs or even talk with captioning (i.e in the main YouTube video and not in Seesmic) on just about anything. This has become a "closed forum discussion" based on an ideology and control versus an "open forum discussion" based more on greater freedom of expression and speech, and inclusiveness. Sounds very familiar doesn't it?

But remember,  no freedom of speech is being violated because it's a privilege to be on a discussion forum rather than a right. The owners can do whatever they want with their website on hosting a forum discussion.

Back to the ensuing comments I noticed in two different vlogs in ASLrocks about the author of the video "Trust your leaders about AB 2072?".  The hate was palpable in several comments rather than to simply agree to disagree. That environment has an air of "if you disagree with us then you are not welcomed here" sort of thing. Not everybody, mind you. Just those that I noticed and a general feeling overall when the two forums are compared.

People do have their reasons and preferences on choosing which video forum they prefer to watch and/or participate in and I respect that. That is their choices. No one is twisting anybody's arm to become a member of either ASLrocks or DVTV video discussion forum. Although with peer pressure it can be a form of arm twisting in this case, especially if people think you are a "traitor" for being a member of one discussion forum and try the guilt method to change your mind. Whatever. But, boy, that "open society" looks better and better every day.

Anonymous comments no longer allowed!!

I agree with what Tayler is doing. He feels he has no choice. I can imagine all the crap he had to endure seeing all those anonymous comments by deaf cowards who are a bunch of thumb-sucking anal retentative babies in the effort to demean, attack and perhaps even threaten him to some extent through anonymous commenting. Anonymous comments meant to demean and attack Tayler for what he's done with Deafread and DVTV are rather petty. Even petty still to attack him for his own personal opinions. I'd rather see a face or at least a real name to go with the comments but I still do allow anonymous comments to go through my blog today even though some of them are from those who are cowards. Still, I let them through. Normally I'd allow them to go through instead of deleting them which is a rare thing I do. At least I can have some examples of what an anonymous coward looks like in my comment sections when I do my next "Best and Worst Responses" for 2010 as I have done in 2007. My favorite comment for "Best and Worst Responses" in 2007?

“Another eye opener is the claim that 40 percent of my blogs were about him. Now, I've done 1068 blogs in over two years. If I did 40 percent, that would be 427 blogs!! LoL! The guy is really bad at math.”

Yeah, not only delusional but really, really bad at math.

Heh.

The missing ASLrocks.net video pages.....how to find them

Just recently I heard about the numerous complaints of videos disappearing from ASLrocks.net. And how some are calling it "unfair" or violation of their "freedom of speech". This "freedom of speech" violation is laughable because the owner owns that website and can do well what he or she pleases when it comes to operating it. Nobody's "freedom of speech" was violated there because it's a priviledge posting there, not a right. Please know your rights first. This is not one of them.

There's a very simple trick to all this if you want to see the old videos along with the video comments made. No mystery here but a very simple trick. This is what you need to do first.
Go to the original vlogs in YouTube's site and the videos in question that disappeared from ASLrocks.net pages. Be sure to write down the full title of that original video in YouTube.

Go to Google.

-Type in the words like - "ASLrocks.net" and be sure to put them in quotes.
-Then type in exactly the words of the name of the original video in YouTube that's gone missing in ASLrocks.net. For example, "Tidewater & USA" and make sure it's in quotes.

It'll look like this in Google search result.

And then click on one of the search results cache link which will finally get you to the cache page that captured the last snapshot of the missing videos that were removed. This includes all of the video comments from other participants as well you will see. Those video comments work fine if you want to view the video responses and the original video.

You can repeat this using other original video titles that have gone missing in ASLrocks.net. Make sure you put them in quotes "" and make sure you include "ASLrocks.net" at the same time in the Google search engine. Everything is there as far as I know. You can only view them and you cannot respond but they are there for your enjoyment.

Enjoy!

BTW, if you're wondering, I don't go to ASLrocks.net to watch. I like my DVTV when I'm in the mood. Sorry to disappoint ya guys.

Enemies of Choices

There is a recurring yet common theme I keep seeing in some segments of the Deaf community and that is the constant attempts to restrict choices whether it's choices on communication options or about competitions or of ideas.

Let's begin with Deafread, a blog and vlog aggregator site.

In the beginning many liked what Deafread was doing. So did the people who linked their cochlear implant, AVT, oral/aural blogs and by bloggers who may be critical about some ideas or people in the Deaf community. This was soon met with a gradual backlash by some segments of the Deaf community believing it was time that Deafread needed to refuse blog links on those very subjects. Deafread refused and believe that readers have the right to choose their own subjects or topics for their reading pleasure. It is an aggregator site.

Let's look at DVTV, a mostly signing vlog aggregator website.

In the beginning many liked what DVTV was doing. So did the people who did their videos on many subjects even by some vloggers who may have been critical about some components of the Deaf community. This, too, was soon met with a gradual backlash by some segments of the Deaf community believing it was time that Deafread needed to be shutdown over certain controversies. DVTV didn't bow to their demands. Viewers and participants have the right to choose their subjects for their viewing pleasure.

Let's look at the recent AB2072 bill controversy. It was a bill about choices where ASL was quickly amended to this bill along with many other communication options to help make available to parents of children with hearing loss so they can make an informed decision. But many Deaf people were against this bill outright. Many Deaf people were in favor of the concept of that bill and supported it. And many Deaf people were against it unless amended to their satisfaction.

Promoting Veditz's 1913 speech.

Veditz at the time was for the preservation of sign language (ASL, BSL, etc). His support for it was valid at the time. But today's technology makes a huge impact on communication choices and how it has fostered competition over ideas. Over time the educational component improved in its understanding on what works effectively and in what particular environment for a child with hearing loss. Just as well over time we saw information on these communication and educational options become increasingly available and easy to access over the internet. Compare this electronic access to information of today to parents of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and even into the 1990s who had to struggle to get their needed information and the people they needed to contact in regard to their child with a hearing loss.

Using Veditz's "enemy" speech is an outdated attempt to try and squelch choices and competition. An attempt to try and squelch other hearing loss support organizations that may be more favorable to other communication or educational options. What people tend to forget is that parents of children with hearing loss have the trump card. It is they who have the duty and right to make an informed choice on the decision for communication and/or educational options. The decision does NOT belong to any one deaf/hh or Deaf organizations or groups of people. The child belongs to the parents.

Veditz lived in a time when there were NO form of technology that can help with the communication and educational components for people with hearing loss. It made great sense at the time about sign language since technology simply did not exist. Yet, sign language is still valuable today. However, using Veditz's speech today in the attempt to call out other hearing loss organizations as their "enemies" will simply not work. Why?

1) It's because of our improving technology and greater understanding on the educational component for children with hearing loss.

2) Secondly, it will not work because doing so make them look like an extremist group who are against choices, competition, and the free exchange of ideas.

3) And thirdly, there is no one size shoe fits all for all children and adults with hearing loss.

This is all about choices.

There is so much what technology has to offer for people with hearing loss and understanding that it is technology that ensures choices will remain on the table and not be restricted by any one hearing loss organization or culture group.

Compared to 15 to 20 years ago what we have now we didn’t have then or the improvement we have now. It might seem snail pace but if you put everything together there has been leaps and bounds on the improvements in communication and technology in virtually in all areas.

*Internet relay service
*Automatic transcriptioning of videos on YouTube (accuracy varies)
*Video phone
*CART
*Communication Devices (UbiDuo)
*Enabled smartphones for people with hearing loss
*Video relay service via smartphones
*Instant Messaging (AIM, Yahoo, MSN, etc)
*Real time texting, simultaneous communication via smartphones (UbiVia)
*Email
*Movie theater captioning
*DVD/CD/Tape movie CC
*Real time human captioning
*Free subtitling/captioning software
*Digital hearing aids
*Cochlear implants
*Blogging
*Vlogging
*Internet video captioning (e.g. Project ReadOn)
*Automatic real time captioning (non-human, continues to improve)
*Core computer chips by improving efficiency, speed and performance where we go from dual core chips, to quad, to 16 core, to 32 to soon in a few years a several thousand core chip that will help in the area of communication including ASL recognition software (ASL to voice, ASL to text, text to voice, voice to ASL, Voice to text, voice to translated voice and so on).

The United States is the most technologically advanced along with vast support in the social services on providing the most communication access and choices for people who are deaf and hard and hearing. In fact, we are the most "spoiled" bunch of people in the world in that respect but at the same time we continue to bethe proving grounds for the world to see on technological advancements for people with hearing loss.

Choices. It continues to grow. Technology will ensure that.