Deaf Blog RAGE!!

You’re familiar with the term. It’s something like “road rage” when a person uses a vehicle as way to bully other drivers on the road either to get them out of the way or to pester them like a festering pimple on the face. It is seen as an extension of the person’s personality and weapon of choice. “Road rage” is actions that are marked with heightened hostility, anger, and even blind rage where drivers simply do not think straight at all. Just like “blog rage” bloggers (or even commenters) use their blogs or internet as a way to bully others by using words of intimidation, hostility, rage, and even threat of injury or death. This sort of thing happens all the time whether the blogger (or commenter) is deaf or hearing.

But sometimes a “blog rage” is harder to ascertain if it’s really a rage thing or a blogger just being a complete idiot. Or is he or she acting like a baby? Or is this a case of an overly sensitive blogger who just doesn't know any better? Just as there are drivers who use “passive violence” (such as purposely driving slowly to irritate drivers from behind or tailgate closely behind cars) could be debated whether it is a form of “road rage” or not. And compare that with such extremes like waving a gun while driving at other drivers, cutting them off on purpose, yelling and cursing, giving other drivers the “finger,” braking suddenly forcing cars behind them to swerve out of the way and so on. Just like “blog rage” there’s a variety of responses but all of them have one purpose in mind and that is to personally try and eviscerate via words against a person’s well being rather than to debate or argue in a fashion that’s respectable.

Like a lot of people, I’ve seen several deaf blogs that exhibited a clear cut case of “blog rage” but I won’t mention them or put the links in here. Instead, I’ll let the commenters post the links if they feel a particular deaf blog they’ve chosen has the classic example of a “blog rage” gone amok. Over the past 4 or 5 years while more and more deaf/hh bloggers came onto the blogosphere scene so I’m sure there must be plenty more examples of “blog rage” that exist out there. A few have even gone completely apoplectic which was completely idiotic, insane and sad at the same time.

So, if you do choose a particular blog piece, why do you think that blog piece constitutes a “blog rage” when it could be a matter of a simple disagreement of opinions or ideas? How do you know if it’s “blog rage” or not? Can a “blog rage” be about making fun of people? Such as a blogger’s anger manifested in the form of mockery? Sort of like “passive violence” in one example I discussed above? Or is the blogger making a clear cut case of a “blog rage” by getting downright personal and nasty against another person or blogger? Exactly what is the purpose or motive behind these “blog rages” that we seen from time to time? Are these bloggers exhibiting infantile reactions or are they sadly misinformed and not know any better? Is this their way of spreading rumors? Gossiping? A rage manifested in the form of disinformation and lies? Or it is just plain “blog rage”? I’m asking you to give me some examples of “blog rage” and I’m particularly interested in blogs themselves and not by what commenters put down. I’m sure Kokonut Pundit readers are interested on what you have to say, too. Is there a serious problem in the deaf community whose deaf/hh bloggers exhibit “blog rage”? Or is this the same norm as one would expect in the hearing community? Or perhaps this “problem” is more magnified because of close knitted deaf community?

In essence, you, the readers, tell us what you think and provide any links to deaf/hh blog pieces that could be an example of a “blog rage” gone amok (or maybe very close to it) and I'll put them up in my update section.

Is it really that bad out there folks?

UPDATE: Got an email alert about how some people are actually complaining about my use of the word "deaf" in my some of my topics of my blog headline. I say to those people, please for the love of God, lighten up and stop whining at everything I write! For once, to those few readers, get some thick skin if this really bothers you! Or better yet, don't even read my blog at all! Gee whiz you folks.

Yeah, it must be bad out there, folks. Not the least bit surprised.

No Gays in Iran? What about Deaf Gays?

I can imagine the outcry but perhaps dear old Uncle Ahmadinejad is right when he said there are no gays in Iran?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said, "In Iran, we don't have homosexuals like in your country. We don't have that in our country. In Iran, we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who has told you that we have it."

Must be a paradise country where Iranian authorities are out and about making sure there are no gays in Iran by executing them, young and old, one by one like cleaning out rats in an old barn according Khatami, former Iranian president.

“Homosexuality is a crime in Islam and crimes are punishable,” Khatami said. “And the fact that a crime could be punished by execution is debatable.”

Maybe the second question to Uncle Ahmadinejad ought to have been asked, "Why do you act gay if you say there are no gays in Iran?" just to see his reaction for fun?

Yeah, America is so terrible. Land of the oppressed. Everybody is oppressed day in and day out if you're among the minority group. Even deaf people are so oppressed that they can't get anywhere in America much less go to school for proper learning compared to Iran; and yet deaf Iranians are certainly far better off (from getting executed) than any Iranians who are gay in Iran (how ironic).

After the 1979 Revolution, many skilled people in deaf education left Iran for the West. This situation placed the Iranian Deaf people in a difficult predicament and caused a “Dark Age” for them. Today, many Iranian Deaf people do not understand what the teachers say. The schools are all conducted orally. Fortunately, the Department of Health and Tavanbakhshi University employ some literate Deaf people. For this reason, the third edition of Iranian Sign Language dictionary has expanded since the 1979 Revolution. Today, a fourth edition of the Iranian Sign Language dictionary is being completed.

Deaf schools: Deaf children throughout Iran are shocked when they visit the deaf schools. The environment is different than what they are used to. For all students, there is compulsory religious instruction at school. Girls are taught that learning to be a good mother is more important than pursuing careers. Iranian women are discouraged from leaving their homes. The government proscribes the intermingling of men and women in public places. A dress code is mandatory for all Iranians as well. Unlike girls, boys are expected to pursue higher educational or vocational training.

Deaf women: Prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, women were able to freely associate with men. However, this was no longer true afterwards. Deaf Iranian women, in particular, had difficulty in adjusting to the societal changes caused by the 1979 Islamic Revolution. For example, courtship was considerably more difficult for deaf Iranian women. During the reign of the Shah, educational and judicial reforms were put into place that lessened the influence of the religious classes and laid the basis of a modern state. Women were freed from the Hijab and Chador. (Hijab and Chador are Farsi terms meaning clothing that cover the hair and bodies of women.) Divorce laws were modified in their favor.

A good read if you're wondering about deaf Iranians in Iran. Yet I don't see any news of deaf Muslims excecuted for being deaf. Or beaten to a pulp for not using one's own voice. I wonder what would happen if one is deaf, gay and an Iranian in Iran? Does Uncle Ahmedinjad know?

But alas, I now wonder if any gay Iranians in America and elsewhere (except in Muslim countries, of course, because there are no such thing as gay Muslims! ) will rise up and publicly challenge Ahmadinejad's contention that there are no gays in Iran. Or will they?

Should be interesting to watch gay liberals against liberals who applauded Uncle Ahmedinejad at Columbia University (known for trying to invite Hitler back in 1933) with his love, peace, brotherhood and all that feel good bunkem at the end of his speech. Looks like we're about to see a repeat in Holocaust history.

*Disclaimer - If you go into a apoplectic fit after reading this, read it again just to be sure. And please leave your conspiracy theories at home about me and this story because they're idiotic enough to even consider if you haven't already noted the sarcastic tone to begin with.

Idiocy in the Blogosphere

Paotie wrote an interesting piece that was accepted at BlogCritics Magazine with the title "Idiocy in the Blogosphere" that started off with a question:

I got an email from a friend the other night asking me what I thought of a blog that asked the question of why people make negative comments on other people’s blogs. In reading the article, I came away with the impression that many bloggers despise the negative comments made by people who criticize a point, argument, perspective, poems, videos, or whatever else is published on a blog.

The article continues to describe the kind of bloggers (and commenters) that exist out there with apt descriptions including how some bloggers are simply not the Wall Street Journal types. Paotie, just as well, recognizes (as do many others) the differences between various kinds and types of blogs who are on the short end of the stick.

There's lots of other blogs that do nothing but spew trash on a daily basis, and people snort it up like lines of cocaine at a party hosted by Lindsay Lohan.

But later on into his article he links to the Style magazine which I found out that Hillary Clinton was being disparaged upon like she was the plague (she is now to the Deaf community) all because of my recent blog (I would certainly think that'd be the case) back in June that discussed her relationship with the deaf and hard of hearing community such as the cochlear implant industry, SHHH, and even AGBell. Pretty apparent that Clinton is slowly being dumped upon by many people in the the Deaf community. Looks like my effort is paying off when I dug around and found some juicy details about Billary Clinton.

Paotie even chastised a certain person for even suggesting to the Deaf community on not to call 911 for help fearing that the end result would be that of police brutality. I even laughed when the author in Style magazine said "hearing impaired." Some people in the media will never learn. Yet, no outrage over the "hearing impaired" comment?

Ok. Maybe they're not "angry" enough.

And then we see Paotie makes a valid point near the end of his article.

If you don't like a blog that you read, then don't continue reading it, and especially don't go back for more cyber-horse manure to be shoveled into your mouth.Just sit down, shut up, and open your mind.

If you're pissed off by now, then you've proved my article right. If you're not pissed off and disagree with me, then good for you. I don't care if you agree with me or not. If you feel you need to dissect this article, then you've got way too much time on your hands. If you want to post a negative comment, please do so.

BTW, Paotie is deaf, lives in Colorado, an avid MMA fan, signs and certainly gets angry upon seeing idiocy in action.

Murtha, Haditha, and Due Process

It took a common sense, gutsy blogger, Jason Mattera from the Young America's Foundation, to ask congressman Murtha about what he said about the Marines in the Haditha case. See the tape.


JASON MATTERA: Congressman Murtha? Jason Mattera, Young America's Foundation. Now that the murder charges against Lance Corporal Justin Sharratt and Steven Tatum have been dropped in the Haditha incident or are in the process of being dropped, would you like to issue an apology for saying that they "killed innocent civilians in cold blood"?

MURTHA: The trial is still going on.

JASON MATTERA: Justin Sharratt and Steven Tatum, the two men you accused of murdering innocent civilians in cold blood --

MURTHA: The trial is still going on.

JASON MATTERA: No. No, the charges are in the process of being dismissed.

MURTHA: I don't know what's going on.

JASON MATTERA: They're in the process is being dismissed.

MURTHA: Out! Out!

JASON MATTERA: Do you like besmirching our troops, sir? Do you like besmirching our troops, sir?

MURTHA: You been in the service? I enlisted in Korea, and I enlisted in Vietnam.

JASON MATTERA: Sir, you accused them of murdering innocent civilians in cold blood. That's something that would come from al-Jazeera, not a congressman, sir.


Now, there are many people who automatically declard those Marines guilty of purposely murdering inocent civilians in "cold blood" even before a trial could begin! It's an irresponsible act, just like Murtha, to declare them "guilty" by not giving these Marines their due process in court they so richly deserved.

There are at least two Deaf/deaf/hh bloggers/commenters that I know of who made references to Haditha, meaning those Marines, in a context could be seen that they were guilty..guilty...guilty of murder by just the mere mentioning of the word "Haditha." A context could be seen as one thing and that Haditha was to be used as an example of how Marines go about purposely murdering innocent civilians.

Doing so does not leave much room for any shred of doubt given to those Marines. Which can only mean one thing, those people never really believed in due process or that they are innocent until proven guilty in the first place. Otherwise they wouldn't use "Haditha" in such a context exemplifying the notion that those Marines were guilty of murder just like Murtha who believed that they are guilty until proven innocent. A dangerous concept amongst some liberals who embrace that kind of thinking which belong but to a backward world.

People who toss the word "Haditha" around in such a way by making a general reference about U.S. soldiers who purposely murder innocent civilian in "cold blood" in reminence, context-wise, of the My Lai massacre that took place in during the Vietnam war. Not good idea at this point to even suggest that. Even in the My Lai case those U.S. soldiers still deserved due process and that they were innocent until proven guilty. This Haditha case is certainly no My Lai.

What they, and Murtha, should have done is support the troops by saying that those in the Haditha case have every right to a due process and that they are to be seen as innocent until proven guilty, and not the other way around. Those two Deaf/deaf/hh bloggers/commenters are in good company with Murtha's mentality who do not really support the troops by besmirching those Marines by whispering the word "Haditha!" as if they're making a point. They are. Just that it makes them seem not very supportive of U.S. troops in the first place.

Do you like besmirching the troops, too? You know who you are.

Now, I am not going to mention names right now unless they can provide a satisfactory (unlikely at this point) explanation on why they mentioned "Haditha" in such a way it could only mean one thing. Those Marines were guilty of murder and yet, at the same time from what I can tell, never gave any thoughts about due process that all red-blooded Americans deserve to have in a U.S. or military court system.

It ain't over and charges of murder continue to drop.

Semper Fi!

Fred Thompson the Top Visited Candidate Last Week

It's not a surprise after Fred Thompson announced his official run for president '08 that his website, Fred '08, was the top visited candidate last week according to Hitwise.

Top Visited Presidential Candidate Websites
Weekly US Market Share of Visits

Weekly rankings for the week ending 09/08/2007

Rank
Candidate
Domain
Market Share %

1
Fred Thompson
www.fred08.com
34.73%

2
Barack Obama
www.barackobama.com
13.49%

3
Ron Paul
www.ronpaul2008.com
12.88%

4
Hillary Clinton
www.hillaryclinton.com
10.38%

5
John Edwards
www.johnedwards.com
6.52%

Or you can see the graphical results compared amongst the 4 Republican candidates.

Perhaps it's only an initial, ahem, surge by taking advantage of those who waited long enough to see him make the official announcement did they flock to his new website and that we shouldn't see anything more out of this? Or maybe it was an ingenious plan by Fred to wait until September while leaving the rest of the candidates to argue and bicker amongst themselves for a whole year first? Both Republicans and Democratic candidates.

But like everybody else, it's too early to tell and anything can happen from now til November 2008.

sComm Racing team meets with ARCA officials at Pit Stop

The Gunderson racing team is beginning to shape up for the 2008 ARCA racing season. Daren Havens, Director of Marketing, invited Greg Gunderson, Jason Curry of sComm, Inc, Jeff Prail (ASL interpreter for Greg), and Jerry Sears (a close friend of Jason Curry who has been a part of the racing industry for 30 years) to come to St. Louis as special guests and meet all the ARCA officials. Daren escorted them to the ARCA race on August 31 and introduced them to everyone in the ARCA organization. The location of the meeting with ARCA officials took place, appropriately so, in the pit stop at the St. Louis Gateway International Speedway.

Daren Havens, Director of Marketing for ARCA racing had this to say about Greg Gunderson and the upcoming ARCA racing series for 2008:

"This could be the most exciting and historical event ever to take place in the ARCA/NASCAR industry to bring the first deaf racing driver"

He also said he believes that once Greg enters the ARCA series, he will bring the biggest fan base to the racing scene from across the country.

This will be an unprecedented but historical racing event to have the first ever professional ARCA driver who is Deaf. But before Greg start driving on the hot asphalt he will travel to North Carolina to practice for 3 days driving a sanctioned ARCA car from November 30-Dec 2 at a racing school. If things go well Greg Gunderson will start off the 2008 year to become the first professional ARCA race car driver who happens to be Deaf.

Pictures below records the pit stop meeting with ARCA officials and Speed TV channel who is planning to do a television story on Greg Gunderson.


Jeff Prail on the left interpreting for Daren Havens at right.



L to R: Jeff Prail, Greg Gunderson, Daren Havens, Jerry Sears, Jason Curry


Jason Curry talking to Daren Havens on the UbiDuo with Jerry
looking over Jason's shoulder while they discuss plans of bringing
Greg to the ARCA racing as the first Deaf ARCA driver in 2008.



Jason talking to the officers from the Speed TV channel who plan
to do a TV special about Greg once things go well after Greg's
3-day racing practice at the North Carolina racing school later this year.


Andy Hillenburg on left in yellow shirt talking to Greg Gunderson
on the UbiDuo discussing plans to come to North Carolina for
racing school from November 30 - Dec 2. You can learn more
about Andy's racing school here.


Group picture with Andy Hillenburg (yellow shirt) after coming
to an agreement for Andy to host Greg at his racing school in
North Carolina.


ARCA race line up at St. Louise Gateway International Speedway
before the race started. Greg and Jason walked along the length
of this track admiring each race car. What an incredible experience
it was for them! *All pictures are properties of sComm Racing, LLC.*

ARCA officials first recognized Greg Gunderson's racing talent and was the first to grab him before any of the ASA officials got a hold of him. This move was a boon to Greg Gunderson's racing career since it would help move him a year closer in his transition to the NASCAR racing series. What's more, the Gunderson racing team (Sprint racing only) has decided to call their new ARCA racing team "sComm Racing, LLC" in honor of Jason Curry, president of sComm, Inc, for his hard work and savvy business approach on helping Greg achieve his life long dream to become the first Deaf NASCAR driver in the history of Deaf sports.

So, the time is now to contact Jason Curry, business manager for sComm Racing, LLC, if you are interested in sponsoring Greg Gunderson and his new ARCA racing team. Contact Jason Curry at jason@scommonline.com for more information.

Look to Kokonut Pundit for more breaking news this December if things go as planned. And if so, Deaf, deaf and hard of of hearing racing fans will not be disappointed! Stay tuned....

See more blogs on Greg Gunderson by Mike McConnell.

Greg Gunderson Sprint Car Racing Result

Greg Gunderson had not raced in a sprint car for more than a year and last night for the very first time he did well considering the time he was away from racing. Last week's race was canceled due to rain and the race had to be postponed until September 15 which was last night. I received the good news via phone text that Greg started in 19th place at the beginning of the race and throughout the night he managed to edge up and finished in 10th place. Not bad considering he hasn't raced in over a year.

Next, be sure to watch out for the year 2008 where he plans to race on asphalt for the very first time in the ARCA racing series which is a step below from racing in the NASCAR series. An ambitious plan of Greg is to climb up to the NASCAR racing circuit sometime in 2009. Now, if you are an email subscriber of Greg Gunderson's racing team you would have gotten that information first! So, sign up! Greg's racing team continues to look for sponsors to help make this a dream of his to become the first ever Deaf NASCAR driver.

Kokonut Pundit readers, there are more spectacular news in the pipeline and will release them when the time is appropriate. You ain't seen nothing yet on what's coming down the pike for 2008. So start sponsoring Greg Gunderson's racing team!

UPDATE: Photos of Greg Gunderson and Troy (owner of Sprint race car that Greg drove in the race) communicating using the Ubi Duo by sComm.














UPDATE: Check out this first historical event ever to take place in the ARCA/NASCAR industry to bring the first deaf racing driver to the racing scene. See photos of this historic news.

UPDATE II: Additional racing photos courtesy of Greg Gunderson.


Greg Gunderson at the I-90 Speedway’s “Season Points Championship”
race in Hartford, SD. September 15, 2007.


Greg Gunderson moving ahead closer to 10th place.


Greg Gunderson in action.



Christa, Greg Gunderson and Grandpa


Post race group photo.

Are You a Gym Rat?

There seems to be a lack of deaf/hh people who enjoy going to the gym and work with the weights. After all obesity is a serious issue in America and more people do not take the time to exercise. A sad fact. But for those who do workout they don't exactly advertise that fact over the internet and I wonder why. Maybe it's because they are insecure talking about it? They don't want to spend the time to discuss weightlifting or other similar sports (e.g. strongman, powerlifting, bodybuilding competitions, etc) or share tips? Or perhaps they feel it's not worth talking about it because of the perception of not enough deaf/hh people like to exercise with weights and many are not really that serious (ie gym rats) in the first place.

There are two kinds of people who work out using weights. One is generally interested in keeping fit using weights and cardio to help tone the body, reduce bodyweight and achieve the ability to climb the stairs without passing out. And to use the gym to socialize. The other kind are the ones who are interested in going just beyond fitness either to add bulk to their size and/or strength. Typically those in bodybuilding aim for size, density, and definition. Though they are strong but are in a different class when compared to a power lifter or strongman/woman.

Ok. You're wondering what's a gym rat? Well, it's somebody who constantly go to the gym to work out at least several times a week, even going twice a day. As for me, I don't see myself as a "gym rat" per se nowadays. I did when I was younger. But I only work out about 5 days a week with the weekends off. Sometimes it's 4 days a week even though I'm known to get intense in my workouts. But if that makes me a gym rat, so be it.

I do believe there are deaf/hh people out there who really do enjoy working out with weights at the gym and get their nirvana high workout burn. And then there is the question of why there are very few forums dedicated to those who are deaf/hh and like to workout with the weights? Few have tried to start a forum specifically on working out with the weights but they have largely gone to the wayside and discontinued or show very little activity due to the lack of interest such as Deaf Weightlifting or Deaf Strength. The lack of interest certainly does raise a lot of questions. Perhaps with the increase interest in Matt Hamill's UFC fight will we find more deaf/hh people flocking to nearby MMA gyms and start exercising? Who knows?

The irony in this day and age is that we can blog or vlog to our heart's content on any subjects including weightlifting, bodybuilding, powerlifting or even strongman/woman topics. A platform to discuss weightlifting or gym exercise tips, information, and knowing which gym rat we have out there. For a deaf community who likes sports, there seems to be a shortage of these deaf/hh people who are hidden away, fearful to come out from the shadows and say, "Yes, I'm a gym rat."

Paotie's Lair - When Deaf People Practice the a-wordism

Paotie has an interesting blog about how some Deaf people use "avdism" (misspelled on purpose) against other Deaf/deaf/hh people. A bit of an ironic twist that turns the table against the very people who toss this a-wordism around with regular abuse. His blog is an insightful commentary about how some Deaf people practice avdism when they want to try and "fix or cure" deaf and hard of hearing people and get them to use ASL by using the Matt Hamill pre - UFC 75 fight as an example.

Paotie is a deaf person from Colorado who visits Albuquerque, New Mexico to train and workout at a gym for MMA enthusiasts. His stare is known chill people's bones.

Matt Hamill Releases Statement about UFC Fight

From Matt Hamill's official website:

"I think MMA is a great sport and I don't believe in any kind of a fix. The two judges that scored the win for Bisping obviously need to re-evaluate the way they score a fight. You can't win a fight when you run for three rounds. They need to study the criteria for scoring an MMA fight: effective striking, grappling, takedowns, aggression and control. Bisping did none of that in my opinion."

To see Bisping's Official statement go here.


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

A Cordial Response to Jeff Carlson

Today's comment by Jeff Carlson in his own blog.

My response:

If you had respect for me, Jeff, then why not admit the fact that you were wrong considering how I do my YouTube search every 2 to 3 weeks using only the search tag word "deaf". YouTube has a "date added" button which leaves me only to scan two or three pages worth of videos that were recently added. Yet you desperately wanted to believe otherwise for some odd reason. Are you forming your opinion on your own or from other people interjecting into yours? Remember, you said the "deaf p0rn" search terms weren't your idea in the first place. So, who is doing the influencing on your part in forming an opinion based on false assumptions? You need to consider the sources of your bias first. It serves no purpose to blog like that in the deaf community other than to raise awareness on the libel and defamation issue. Or are you suggesting that the deaf community follow your lead that it is alright to libel and defame people on the internet? What gives?

Also, you have not explained your reason why you think that way when the method of my search is plaintively obvious by using only one word, "deaf," and then hit the button to organize the video results from earliest to latest entry. This is a commonly used method when reviewing the latest video uploads. But using the "conservative" meme as a source of your explaination (a la Senator Craig, et al), if that is the case, isn't worth a dime but an excuse to libel me on purpose, which has no merit in of itself using the party line approach.

And if you want to go about the subject of "misguided" you need to look again on what you wrote about how I did my YouTube search. The Deaf Bunny YouTube video was only 5 days old when I came across it when I used the "deaf" search term and hit the "date added" button to organize the video entry. It was on the first page when I saw it and was surprised that a deaf owned porn company even existed. I have never heard such a thing before and so I blogged about it. And because of that I learned about PoleCat Pictures from another commenter which I haven't heard before either. Otherwise your logic would be saying that I put down "deaf p0rn" every two or three weeks on YouTube to see if there's anything related to deaf porn over the last year or so when YouTube popularity was on the rise until one day I finally came across a video that actually had a deaf porn video in it. You tell me the logic in that thinking.

It's all about common sense, Jeff. There is no need for me to look at anything specific in YouTube when all I need to do is use the search tag word "deaf" and organize the list by earliest to latest and pick a few videos. An pick the ones that catches my interest and see what people are saying. This is part of my research pattern and a way for me to learn more on what's going on out there.

However, it is extremely hard for me to believe a person who says he has "tremendous respect" for me but at the same time calls me a liar and a pervert in a blog. Why should I even bother to meet with you, which would be nice as I have met many other bloggers earlier this year at the vlog/blog conference at Gally, when you have not shown any respect to me in your blog in the first place? Do you not understand the seriousness of libel and defamation? Or do you actually think it's all a big joke? And if you haven't heard what Murphy's Law is about I suggest you read up on that. And if I am "misguided" then you need to explain how I am "misguided" and in what way. But for now try and see that from my perspective for a change considering what you have done lately. Right now, Jeff, you do not have my respect at heart at all.

UPDATE: Jeff has gone off the deep end. Sorry, Jeff. You have lost total respect from me for a guy who continues to lie about his so-called respect for me.

Along with his imagination running wild. He has knowingly lied from the beginning to end. Misguided he is. With none of the wits. And for a guy who can't even get it right the first and last time using common sense certainly begs the question his IQ. No need to address this issue when I've been correct all along. Let's move this along and bury this dung.

UPDATE II: Saw just the short blurb in EXTRA Deafread rather than reading the whole thing, seems like he's having an existential meltdown, basically so. Reminds me of that caveman commercial, too. Can't help but laugh at that one commercial.

UPDATE III: Now, he's a little, ahem, "obsessed" with me. Maybe that's an understatement?

Why Throw "Avdism" as a Reason for Matt Hamill's Fight Loss?

This is probably something I will not understand the logic of how some Deaf people would throw in their "avdism" (purposely misspelled) theory as a reason why Matt Hamill loss the fight to Bisping given to him by 2 out of 3 judges. I am in the same boat as Paotie.com (another deaf New Mexico resident in Albuquerque) about the silly notion of using the a-wordism.

Yet, I have come across a few people who commented in my comment section saying it was "avdism" that resulted in Matt to lose the fight. Balderdash I say! I wouldn't waste my time discussing that. Just isn't worthy to get into that kind of hokey conspiracy theory. I believe it has more to do with favoritism to a hometown fighter than anything else than thinking along the line that Bisping was losing to a deaf fighter. Also, the judges were using a point system similar to that of a boxing system to rate hitting points given to fighters. Though not overly familiar but I have read a few articles that mentioned this and the fact that Dana White want a better scoring system that would better reflect the MMA fights and not just purely boxing. But this current scoring system simply has to be overhauled. Dana White is determined to do that in order to better reflect the MMA style of fighting. But one guy, from Fox Sports, doesn't think so and thinks the current scoring system is fine the way it is despite it's flaws (an understatement considering on what just has happened).

The 10-point must system was put in place by the New Jersey Athletic Control Board in 2000 and has become the standard for virtually every MMA promotion in the country. When New Jersey, and later Nevada, chose to regulate the sport, it saved it from near extinction in the process. But the system put in place is kind of like the Electoral College when it comes to presidential elections. It's probably not the best system.

Sometimes the guy who gets the most votes loses.

But most of the time it works fine.

The original UFC judging system from late 1995-2000 was simple. If a fight went the time limit, the judge wrote the name of the person they thought won the fight on a piece of paper. Anyone can watch a fight and decide for themselves who wins. But sometimes when you put numbers into the equation, they don't add up.

In a three-round fight, usually this happens when one guy wins a round dominantly, and the other two rounds are hard to pick. The guy who won the dominant round should win the fight, but a close round can go either way. A guy could have won the fight in the old method, but still lose on the cards 29-28 if judges gave the two close rounds to the opponent. That's largely what happened here.

In fact, Dave Meltzer said that Hamill was lucky he didn't win only because he was on Bisping's hometown turf.

People who complain Hamill got robbed have by this point missed the much larger point. Fighting is about making stars, and stars are not made on won-loss records. Hamill became a bigger star in losing, because of the post-fight sympathy factor, than he would have had he gotten the decision. And based on the skill levels both men showed in he fight, it's questionable how either man would do against the top light heavyweights. But against each other, a rematch would give both men another high profile fight that there would be great interest in.

Bisping, who may be 15-0 with only one match going to a decision, had his stock drop even though he got the decision. So, in the big picture, Bisping was a little lucky the judging went his way, and Hamill was very lucky it didn't.

Never mind the fact that it was thousands of British fans who booed at Bisping after the win believing it was Hamill who won the fight. But one MMA fan probably came up with one really good answer as to why British MMA fans at the arena booed at Bisping after the fight using the fight song theory.

Bisping comes out to "London's Calling" but he's from Liverpool, no wonder he was booed [after the fight] in London. That's like the Red Sox playing "New York, New York."

And , lastly, never mind the fact that it was Bisping himself who said that it was Matt Hamill who actually won all three rounds in his personal website. I'm sure Dave Meltzer missed that one completely already.

Yes, Dave, this current scoring system simply needs to be overhauled to fit the MMA style of fighting and not boxing.

Soldier in Iraq Reaches Out to Her Deaf Parents

This a great article to read on how a daughter who is currently a soldier in Iraq talks to her parents over the phone.

Pfc. Patti Angel faces communication barriers no amount of waiting in line or talking into a phone from Iraq can help. Her parents are deaf.

Keeping in touch back home is already tough for deployed Soldiers with friends and family members who can hear. Not being able to use conventional means of communication at her disposal makes reaching out to her parents that much harder on Angel.

The 19-year-old food service specialist from Grand Junction, Colo., Company F, 203rd Brigade Support Battalion, Angel has found a way to communicate with her hearing-impaired parents and explained how others can do the same. She uses the Sorenson Video Relay Service to “speak” visually to her mother and father.

“They have a screen with a web-cam on their phone,” Angel said. “I talk to the interpreter, then the interpreter signs what I say to my parents. My parents then sign back to the interpreter and the interpreter talks to me.”

Angel first started signing to her parents when she was 10-months-old, before she even learned to speak. She didn’t learn to communicate vocally until her older sisters taught her English.

“We all learned to sign before we could talk,” Angel said. “My older twin sisters had to go to speech school when they were 2. Then, after my brother and I were born, our sisters taught us how to talk.”

But what's also surprising, even disturbing to a degree, is how one of the older hearing children of Deaf parents had to go to speech therapy in order to speak correctly. And that the older sisters taught their youngest sister on how to talk. Is that how's it's being done today?

Bisping Calls UFC, Request Rematch Against Hamill

In a surprising turn around by Michael Bisping after he had time to cool off and soak in comments from American and British fans about Hamill's obvious win against him, Bisping called the UFC and requested a rematch against Matt Hamill. He felt that Hamill won the first round and was extremely gracious (considering what he has done and said immediately after the fight) and apologetic to Hamill in his personal web site.

As most people will of seen the fight with me and Hamil was a close one. I have seen the controversy surrounding the decision so obviously have to reply. I personally feel he won round 1 and I took rounds 2 and 3. That said it was close and can I understand how some people would think differently. On the night I was given the decision and he wasn’t, on another occasion it could of been different.

Looking at message boards it appears that some (major understatement) people are pissed off about my comments afer the fight. Looking back I should of given Hamill more credit as he fought a great fight and has improved his all round game a hell of a lot. What you have to remember is though the adrenalin was running through my veins, I had fought a hard fight and was obviously happy to get the decision. I would like to take this opportunity to say well done to Matt for fighting great and bringing the fight to me big time, I should have commented on this on the night.

I have contacted the UFC and stated I would like to rematch Hamill at everyones earliest convenience as I’m sure most of you know, no fighter wants a win when the decision is debateable. I am happy for the fight to take place where ever, and look forward to settling the score once and for all. I personally feel we put on a great fight for the fans and perhaps people should focus on this more.

I apologise to all my fans who feel let down by anyhting at the weekend, hey Im a young man with alot of emotion and sometimes say things in the heat of the moment.

I’d like to say thanks to everyone who has sent me there messages. Theres been to many to reply to them all. I will say this though, if Matt Hammils gonna cut me next time he might need a carving knife as Ive definately got thicker skin over the last few days.“

Amazing! I have now much more new founded respect for Bisping. After all it was the judges' bad call who gave the win to Bisping. It wasn't his mistake. His only mistake was his attitude immediately after the fight. But I'm sure he must've seen the video of the fight and saw just how bad he was against Matt Hamill. This fight is planned to be free for MMA fans.

One possible idea is to have the two fight for free on Spike TV as the latest installment of the “Bad Blood” series that has featured grudge rematches between Ken Shamrock and Tito Ortiz, and Jens Pulver and B.J. Penn. If the organization wanted to get creative, rematches between Rob Emerson and Gray Maynard, and Nate Diaz and Manny Gamburyan could fill out the undercard.

Get ready for Bisping vs Hamill II!

Hat tip: CF


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

Defamation and Libel

When defamation and libel actions are wrong. A case example:

Jeff Carlson,

You have no justification on purposely defaming me. I've outlined how I accidentally came across that website via YouTube. It is common sense to arrange the YouTube listings from the earliest to the latest in order to see the most recent video addition. I check up on YouTube every 2 or 3 weeks and scan only the last two or three pages to see the recent deaf video additions. This is what I did. This is how you do your research. It'd be a waste of time to type in "deaf" and and try and find the most recent videos. I have not lied in what I wrote down in my blog on how I came across that YouTube video. I didn't really believe deaf porn existed. Yet it was you who tested "deaf porn" that day to do your own little research but failed to take into consideration the "date added" tab on YouTube to arrange videos by the earliest date. And finding that video opened my eyes that day which was only 5 days old and so I blogged about it. I didn't even know about Polecat Pictures until someone told me in the comment section. We learn something new everyday, even me. What you have done was out of line. You can criticize me but to make libelous and defamatory claims that you have no evidence of is nothing short of reckless. Porn is insidious as well as it can be degrading. I'm sure you saw how one person treated Mish as discussed in Gnarly Dorkette's blog who made a sexist remark at her? That's the thing, we don't need that sort of thing on the internet.

Now, I rather not be a moron nor am I a lying pervert. I made my case and I'm known for my honesty, sometimes harsh but forward, in my blogs. But since you (Jeff) said you'd rather be a moron than a lying pervert then fine.

Moron \Mo"ron\ (m[=o]"r[o^]n), n. [Gr. mw^ros foolish, stupid.]
1. (Pedagogy) A mentally retarded person whose intellectual
development proceeds normally up to about the eighth year
of age and is then arrested so that there is little or no
further development; an adult having the mental
development of an 8-to-12-year old. A moron is considered
capable of doing routine work under supervision.
[Webster 1913 Suppl. +PJC]

The issue here is really about how people ignore or do not understand the differences when it comes to making libel and defamatory remarks.

Scammers who are Deaf

I have heard briefly here and there over the years about scammers who are Deaf and hearing and the damages they have done to the Deaf/deaf community. I hate scammers of any kind (I'm sure everybody hates a scammer, no surprise there). So, I'll be needing your help by seeking your comments on these scammers but I am mostly interested in scammers who are Deaf and add my finding into my research for my upcoming blogs. Since I am aware that this has happened and continues to occur but at the same time I am not overly familiar with the history of scammers who are Deaf (which, by the way, would make a great book) and their preying practices they have done on their Deaf victims. Have you been a victim of a scammer who happens to be Deaf?

Greg Gunderson to Make His Racing Debut on Sept 15

Hey, big news down the road for Deaf/deaf/hh racing fans which will be revealed in due time here on Kokonut Pundit about the up and coming Greg Gunderson. You will NOT want to miss this news!

Don't forget to show your support for Greg Gunderson who is well on his way to become the first ever Deaf NASCAR driver. The year 2008 will certainly be Greg's finest and most memorable year ever. But wait until 2009 when he plan to become the first ever Deaf NASCAR driver in the Annals of Deaf history.

In 2008 Greg plans to race on asphalt tracks in ARCA Series before attempting to become a NASCAR driver in 2009. Right now he is honing his racing skills for the Sprint race in the upcoming September 15th, Saturday at 4PM race debut. The original racing date was September 8 but it was rained out.

Be sure to help Greg find sponsors so spread the word since he'll need all the support he can get for a great 2008 racing year! He must race a full year at the ARCA Series before making the transition to the NASCAR series. He will need your help and support. Send him an email or let other people known about Greg Gunderson who, just like Matt Hamill, is also another role model for the Deaf community.

UPDATE: Check out this first historical event ever to take place in the ARCA/NASCAR industry to bring the first deaf racing driver to the racing scene. See photos of this historic news.

Hamill Overwhelmed with Support from Bisping Fans

Key points:
You wouldn't think that fans of Bisping would actually go up to Matt Hamill after the fight in show of support that it was he who won the fight and not Bisping. It actually happened.

Back at the host hotel following the bout, the people showed how much they cared for Hamill, who was treated like a conquering hero by London fans despite the decision.

“We went back to the hotel and I said, ‘shower up, we’re going down to that restaurant, we’re gonna have a nice dinner and we’re gonna celebrate because you won that fight, you know it, and everybody else knows it,’” said Hamill’s trainer and manager Duff Holmes. “And we went and sat down, and there was a line at his table. People came up and said ‘we’re Bisping fans, but we just want to let you know that you won that fight and you’re in our hearts now.’ It was just great for Matt, because I was telling him all along during the fight ‘you’re winning this fight, you’re winning this fight.’ After the fight was over, I grabbed him and said, ‘you won that fight.’ And when the decision went the other way, we were just in shock. But having the people say that he won the fight was great. I told him to keep his head high and that I’ve never been more proud to be a part of his team.”

The loss still stings though.

“I was obviously disappointed with the decision,” said Hamill. “But I'm not one to complain or question judges. If they said he beat me, I accept it and move on. I know in my heart I won that fight.”

Pretty surreal and touching at the same time about those Bisping fans acknowledging that Hamill won the fight wouldn't you say?


Here are the key points in the UFC official website article:

Hamill is overwhelmed with the support he received from Internet/people who feel he deserved the win.

Bisping continues to think he won the fight.

Bisping was surprised at Hamill's strategy to go out striking.

Hamill was working on stand-up nonstop for last 18 months

Jeff Mullen, who was one of the judges who favored Bisping, explains his scorecard (pretty detailed).

Dana White reiterates that he also think it's a bad decision, and that is why he urges fighters to never leave it to the judges (in other words FINISH fights).

Bisping's fans actually approached Hamill at a restaurant and told him he won the fight in their eyes.

Bisping says Hamill is the first one to have went the distance with him (it is true.... Bisping has always submitted or TKO/KO'd others in the past).

Hamill doesn't mind having a rematch.

Overall a great article to read! And apparently we'll see lots more from Dana White on ensuring that Matt Hamill deserve the continuing chance to fight in the UFC. Hamill has already shown he has that fighting caliber when Bisping was his punching boy that night. And that's an understatement.

Good man that Dana guy.


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

Video - American Hero Matt Hamill defeats Michael Bisping

A cool video recap of the fight between Matt Hamill and Bisping with Matt standing while an American flag wave behind him at the beginning of the video. The rockin music called "Born in the USA" sung by Bruce Springsteen. Watch, listen and follow the song's lyrics at the same time. You can only smile seeing Bisping running around trying to avoid Matt's relentless forward attack. If that is what you call a "win" for Bisping, you're absolutely nutz.



Born down in a dead man's town
The first kick I took was when I hit the ground
You end up like a dog that's been beat too much
Till you spend half your life just covering up

Born in the U.S.A.
I was born in the U.S.A.
I was born in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.

Got in a little hometown jam
So they put a rifle in my hand
Sent me off to a foreign land
To go and kill the yellow man

Born in the U.S.A.
I was born in the U.S.A.
I was born in the U.S.A.
I was born in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.

Come back home to the refinery
Hiring man says "Son if it was up to me"
Went down to see my V.A. man
He said "Son, don't you understand"

I had a brother at Khe Sahn fighting off the Viet Cong
They're still there, he's all gone

He had a woman he loved in Saigon
I got a picture of him in her arms now

Down in the shadow of the penitentiary
Out by the gas fires of the refinery
I'm ten years burning down the road
Nowhere to run ain't got nowhere to go

Born in the U.S.A.
I was born in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.
I'm a long gone Daddy in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.
Born in the U.S.A.
I'm a cool rocking Daddy in the U.S.A.

Hat tip: Mattwins


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

Dana White Sez "No Brainer" on Rematch for Hamill

Looks like Dana White, president of UFC, has answered our questions about the Bisping/Hamill fight result and felt that two rounds ought to have been given to Matt and not Bisping.

And, while they're at it, the UFC honchos should mandate a rematch between Bisping and Hamill.

White said the rematch is "a no-brainer and I'm going to be on it right away."

Having them fight again in a place where an official athletic commission will oversee the affairs is the only way to remove the stench surrounding UFC 75.

I agree with Dana. The only way to remove this stench surrounding the UFC 75 fight debacle is to do a rematch. If that is the case UFC will have to offer a lot more cash to Bisping in order to try and entice him to come over to America where the fight is better regulated. But here's my prediction. I predict that Bisping won't take the offer saying, delusionally so, that he won the fight "fair and square." And probably use Hamill's own "fair and square" post-fight remark as a reason why he don't need to go for a rematch. He said so right after the fight that the issue between him and Hamill is done with. If Bisping can be that brash and delusional at the same time, not to mention the wanton use of obscene gestures to his chagrin against those who don't agree, then certainly why should Bisping risk losing face with another rematch against Matt knowing full well he got lucky the first time? Why risk it?

Ok. Suppose Bisping takes up to the challenge (of course his asking price would be ten times the amount by then since he's now a "star") for a rematch. He loses to Hamill. Would it then be fair for Bisping to demand another rematch for the best out of three?

All in all, Bisping has shown to be a classless act that night and that leaves a bad taste in everybody's mouth, including many Britains.

Hat tip: CF


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

U.S. Newspapers Say Hamill was "Robbed"

Not a surprise. Newspapers and online news across the country are starting to feel the rumble of MMA fans who say that Matt Hamill was robbed of his victory in the much anticipated Bisping/Hamill UFC 75 fight in London last night. Right now the Baltimore Sun is the first to report on this robbery and I will look for more as they come up.

Baltimore Sun - "UFC 75 Recap: Rampage on, Hamill robbed, Houston we have lift off."

Read the comments on this blog and other blogs and forums throughout the Internet and one thing is clear -- almost everyone outside London thinks Matt Hamill won his fight against Michael Bisping. And I agree with them.

I re-watched the fight this morning and rounds one and two easily go to Hamill. Round three could be seen as a toss-up because Bisping had a couple of nice flurries early on in that round. But, Hamill scored a couple of takedowns late in the third round and controlled the second half of that round. I scored the fight 30-27 for Hamill. Being generous to Bisping, one could argue it was a 29-28 fight for Hamill. Either way, Hamill should have walked away a unanimous-decision winner.

At worst, Hamill neutralized Bisping standing up (at best, Hamill controlled the Octagon and landed some very nice punches) and clearly dominated the ground game with numerous takedowns and total control on the ground. I don't remember seeing a single Bisping takedown. Was Bisping's striking that overwhelming to two judges that they gave him two rounds? I just don't see it.

The result brought up another interesting question in my mind -- is MMA judging so subjective that three judges watching the same fight can score the fight so differently? This is an issue that needs to be resolved in the sport in general (I saw the same thing at IFL's team semifinals in August) before people start thinking of the dreaded b-word (boxing) when it comes to decisions. However, these decisions do remind fighters that the only true way to control one's destiny is to win by stoppage. If a fighter doesn't want to lose by a controversial decision, then go for the stoppage!

I've also been asked by a number of readers what UFC president Dana White can do to rectify this decision. In my mind, there's very little he can do. Occasionally, we see decisions like this in the sport (Ortiz-Griffin comes to mind.) However, I do think Dana White can somewhat help the situation by treating both fighters as if they won or at least fought to a draw. Don't punish Hamill and don't give Bisping credit with respect to future matchmaking. And, in the end, maybe the only proper solution is a rematch.

Hamill continues to improve from one match to the next and last night he looked more comfortable on his feet than I've ever seen him. As for Bisping, I would like to see him drop down to middleweight (much like Henderson) and help solidify that division. I think Bisping would have a better chance being a contender as a middleweight than he would fighting at 205 lbs. Last night's fight showed us that both Hamill and Bisping are still middle-of-the-pack light heavyweights.

More to add. If you spot one, let me know.

Brit fans boo Bisping after highway robbery

FANS RALLY AROUND HAMILL - "In what ended up being the focal point for the majority of the fans watching UFC 75, Michael “The Count” Bisping won a very controversial split decision over Cincinnati, Ohio native Matt “The Hammer” Hamill, in what will almost surely go down as one of the worst decisions in UFC history. On the other side of the fight, Hamill showed a tremendous amount of graciousness in defeat and should be commended for not being more upset after a horrendous decision. The fans were also very vocal about this particular fight as the callers into MMAWeekly Radio’s post fight show rallied around Matt Hamill in this bout and voted him Fighter of the Night for his performance and grace in the face of defeat after a decision that no one seemed to agree with. "

Breaking Down Bisping/Hamill - "The bad judging was out side of Bisping's control and he can't be blamed for that. But his behavior afterward is a totally different story. My prediction -- Bisping has been exposed and will begin a downward slide. Hamill is on the upward swing and will be back."

UPDATE: There is a petition going on in support of Matt Hamill's fight.

To: Dana White, UFC President

I and innumerable other UFC and MMA supporters were utterly shocked and completely disheartened at the egregious decision that was made by the judges appointed in deciding the winner of the fight between Matt Hamill and Michael Bisping at UFC 75. This is not merely a complaint clouded by favoritism for one fighter or another, but rather, a resounding outcry being lodged by fight fans, both new and old, at a decision that we find to be exceptionally wrong, as well as an absolute blight to the honor of the UFC and the faith of its ever-growing audience. While we realize that the re-evaluation of such a highly publicized fight will prove costly beyond just monetary concerns, please listen to the fans who know and love MMA, and who are undyingly passionate about this venerable sport (just like you), when a decision such as this is so roundly denounced.

I and those who have signed this petition thank you for your careful and gracious consideration to this matter.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Although I don't know what good it is to petition other than to feel better afterwards. What we really need to see is what Dana White (president of UFC) has to say about all this. This is certainly not something to be swept under the rug when you have over 90% of the people agreeing that it was Hamill who won the fight and not Bisping.


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

Matt Hamill's Use of His Voice - a Controversy?

When is a controversy not a controversy if 30% of the people who voted in my recent poll asking if Matt Hamill's use of his voice was acceptable or not. Why do 30% of them find it controversial whenever Matt decides to use his voice to speak to hearing reporters (or hearing people in general) for the UFC 75 pre-fight taping? Although Matt did sign and talk at the same time in another pre-fight video during the UFC 75 fight show. Does that make it even more wrong that Matt shouldn't have signed and talked at the same time?

Did Ben incorrectly place me (or was he even talking about me as I wonder) as the controversy in his latest DeafDC blog about Hamill's UFC fight loss in his attempt to slam me personally only because I told people to "grow up" with their mentality towards other Deaf people who can use their voice to communicate.? The controversy should be about the 30% who found it unacceptable for Matt to use his voice. Does Ben have a grudge against me or what? Did he post this comment in my blog about that 30% poll survey?

We as a whole didn’t care that Hamill maybe could kind of speak. No one brought it up except for one guy. Matt knew some signs and went through the life as an underdog like us and that was good enough.

Ok. So he has an opinion. So what. Why should *I* be the controversy if I pointed it out to those 30% who find it controversial that Matt used his voice in the first place? Maybe it was because I didn't mince words and spoke my thoughts about this whole thing when I see that people who believed Matt ought to have been signing at all times regardless the hearing environment he's in?

Call it incredulous seeing the poll results. It was.

Or am I hearing that the "30%" result isn't large enough of a percentage to be deemed as a "controversy" in the first place? is that what I am hearing? Well, what is it then? I was somewhat surprised to see such a large result expecting perhaps 5 or even maybe 10% but 30%? C'mon now. Why are people so afraid of criticizing other deaf people for their rigid thinking? I''m glad that some 65% (there exists the other 5% who are not sure) didn't care if Matt used his voice or sign. Granted. Some deaf people are comfortable using their voice. Many are not and choose to sign exclusively. That is not a problem for me and many others. But for many, it is a problem if one decides or prefers to use his/her voice to communicate.

Now, if people really didn't care if Matt spoke or signed 30% of them wouldn't have voted "No" saying that speaking was *unacceptable*. If it didn't matter to them they would've voted "It doesn't matter since I'm not the overly sensitive type about deaf people talking." But alas, there exist overly sensitive Deaf people out there who are against other Deaf/deaf/hh people who can use their voice well to communicate to hearing people. Yet I see them as controversial in their own right and say that they need to grow up and get away from that Deaf militant mindset that signing is to be used at all times.

But wouldn't you think by now that many of Deaf people would have gotten over that mentality knowing there exist within the Deaf/deaf community a complete diversity of communication skills? Why should Deaf people MUST sign at all times in all hearing venues? What about in Deaf venues provided that there are interpreters and real time captioners available? Just like I did when I used my voice at the vlog/blog conference at Gallaudet University earlier this year. I knew it would be a controversy but I didn't care and made my stand to make a point. Only a few deaf people at Gallaudet I know of did that very same thing when there were captioners and interpreters available did they choose to use their voice.

Matt can sign. Matt can speak. Does it really matter on how Matt chooses to use his voice in certain environments? Or does it, folks? Or do you prefer to hold to the rigid Deaf militant thinking that signing is the only optional communication mode by those who have the voicing skill to communicate to hearing people? How many times have you used your voice to communicate to a hearing person yet you voted "No" that Matt shouldn't have used his voice in his pre-fight tapings?

Right. And what does that make you?

Uh huh.

UPDATE: I wasn't sure if Ben was trying to slam me. He didn't. He explained it in DeafDC where I offered my sincerest apologies wondering if he was referring to me or not. Blame it on the coincidence of Ben's comment in my blog and in DeafDC that occurred on the same day covering the same subject.

UPDATE II: Jeff Carlson said it well as a guest blogger on Ridorlive (of all places) after seeing it on Deafread did I finally take a peak after one urged me to take a look and realized it was he who wrote that blog piece:

The key to see progression in our deaf community is encouraging rather than ripping them apart, using the term “unacceptable” to describe other people’s choice. That’s counterproductive. It’s almost too typical to see that in deaf community. It’s like a crab-theory in work. It’s time to move forward.

I'd say it's better to respect an adult's communication choice and by doing so can produce positive results. And to think if I hadn't put out that poll result and commented on it Jeff wouldn't have made his blog piece on that very same subject. Go figure.


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

Bisping Highly Controversal Win over Hamill

I keep seeing forums after forums and now news articles popping up questioning the win judges (2 out 3) gave to Bisping against Hamill in the UFC 75 in London last night. From a British newspaper the Lancashire Telegraph:

Before Saturday's fight, Bisping, 28, of Clitheroe, had vowed: "I will submit him or knock him out", but the fight lasted the maximum three five-minute rounds and the Brit only had his hand raised in victory following a split decision by the three judges.

Many pundits expected the judges to pick 'The Hammer' Hamill and even Bisping appeared momentarily surprised when he got the decision.

Even Bisping was surprised by the decision. I saw his expression on tv last night. If he was surprised by the decision and the majority of people are saying that Hamill won the fight, shouldn't that be a clue that there's something wrong with the judges' decision? It was obvious that Matt did most of the punching and take downs against Bisping while he ran around trying to avoid his relentless approaches.

And now what Bisping said after the fight.

"I know he's a tough fighter so was expecting it to go the distance - it is all good experience for me - but I held out for the win.

"And obviously I am happy.

"Now though, I want to put The Ultimate Fighter show behind me. I proved that title is mine and it is time to put this thing to bed once and for all."

I don't think so, Bisping. Looking at the fight it was obvious that Matt was dominant in Round 1 and 2. And the judges gave points to Bisping for Round 1 and 2? One judge gave all rounds to Hamill but the other two judges gave points to Bisping for Round 1 and 2.

From NBC Sports:

Hamill looked impressive with an improved standup game that never saw him give ground to his opponent, and he also managed several takedowns that should have scored points. One judge scored all three rounds for Hamill, but the other two scored the fight two rounds to one for the hometown hero.

Hey. I'm not alone in this travesty. Some 90 to 95% believed Matt won. And that even came from British and Bisping fans, too. Take a poll on who won that fight and see what others have said. Or take the Sherdog's poll.

I think, according to Sherdog forum covering the Bisping/Hamill fight (over 100 pages!!) that this thing isn't going to go away easily. I see a rematch in the future. I'm sure Couture, Liddel, and many other professional UFC fighters will nod in agreement that Matt clearly won the fight.

What say you Dana White , president of UFC, about the fight? A rematch? Or are you going to ignore 90% of the UFC fans who say that Matt Hamill won?

It's your move, Dana. Make it a smart one.

UPDATE: There seems to be a gathering storm of deaf/hh bloggers saying that Hamill won the fight and he was robbed of that win. Even by those who hated Hamill said that it was obvious that Hamill won the fight. You can't argue against more than 90% who say that it was Matt who won the fight.


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

Matt Hamill Loses Fight Against Bisping!

Matt Hamill loses!

Matt kept moving in while Bisping tried to avoid his forward assault. Matt threw lots of punches. Several take downs. Matt was dominant in round 1 and 2, or so it seems, and probably a tie for round 3 which Matt showed a bit of slowing down. But round 1 was given to Bisping. Round 2 to Bisping and round 3 to Matt (did I get that right?) Anyway, a very narrow win for Bisping.

You did a great job Matt. Don't give up! Get the fire in your belly.

UPDATE: People are saying the decision was rigged. I thought that Matt did very well in the first two rounds. I was quite surprised to see that the judges' decision went to Bisping. Of course, the event took place in London. Wonder what would happen had Matt won the decision? A riot? Even the fans booed at Bisping after the decision in support of Matt obvious win.

UPDATE II: Go to Sherdog forum (beginning on "page 42") where they are discussing the Bisping/Hamill fight. Lots of discussion taking place and most of the postes are in support of Hamill thinking the judges rigged the fight when clearly it was Matt Hamill who dominated the first two rounds. People are absolutely disgusted with the judges. It'll be interesting to see what Dana White (president of UFC) will have to say about this one. This is sounding more and more like a big uproar coming down the pike.

UPDATE III: "I a fan of bisping but i just have 2 agree and say hamill was robbed... I couldnt believe it, u could see the relief in bisping when it was announced.........." (page 42)

UPDATE IV: In another poll about 95% believed Hamill won the fight. This is not about America vs Britain but solely on the merits of the fight itself.

SIGNED by YAHOO SPORTS

Brit fans boo Bisping after highway robbery By Kevin Iole

Saturday, Sep 8, 2007 5:13 pm EDT LONDON -- A sellout crowd at the O2 Arena roared its approval of everything light heavyweight Michael Bisping did Saturday during his fight with Matt Hamill.

Until, that is, the scores were announced. And though the hometown boy, Bisping, won a split decision, more than half those in the crowd booed the decision lustily.

Judge Chris Watts gave all three rounds to Hamill, scoring it 30-27. But judges Cecil Peoples and Jeff Mullen scored it 29-28 for Bisping. I had it 30-27 for Hamill, believing his takedowns and his standup were the difference.

In the first round, Hamill's standup was surprisingly effective. He bloodied Bisping's nose and cut him by the left eye. He also took him down repeatedly.

Bisping never mounted any consistent offense, though he did manage to connect with his jab more in the final two rounds.

The two were heated enemies from their time together on Season Three of The Ultimate Fighter and both talked big prior to the fight.

But the fight didn't live up to the heat and what fight there was seemed to be provided by Hamill.

There's gotta be a "rematch" in there somewhere.


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

Hey! I'm Talking to You! Grow Up!

There is one poll I found to be absolutely appalling and that is seeing one survey result where nearly 30% who participated in the poll voted "No" saying what Matt Hamill did when he used his voice to talk to reporters was "unacceptable."

Now, who are these people? If you are one of those people who voted "No" thinking that talking is wrong then who the hell do you think you are anyway? Matt Hamill is an adult and he chose to use his speaking skill to talk to reporters about his up coming fight against Michael Bisping which will air tonight on SpikeTV at 9 PM ET. This is well within his right to speak with his voice. You people, on the other hand, need to grow up.

For you to say that it was "unacceptable" for Matt Hamill to use his voice at the pre-fight meeting with reporters makes ya'll a bunch of "Deaf militants." Yes. "Deaf militants." Are you guys are a bunch of Deaf bigots, too? Mewling and complaining that Matt Hamill choose to use his voice is "wrong".

What Matt Hamill did was appropriate only because it was his right to choose on how he wanted to communicate. It was appropriate for Matt to use his voice in a venue which was, a no brainer here, full of hearing people. If he decided to sign, then that would be find as well.

These "Deaf militants" who voted "No" need to grow up. Seriously. And recognize individual choices and rights when it comes to mode of communication with other people. You guys need to get out of your fantasy little Deaf world thinking that signing is only allowed at all times for it to be "acceptable." Never mind the fact you have Deaf people with all kinds of communication skills who can hear, listen, speak, talk, sign, use the phone and so on.

Hey! I'm talking to ya! G...R...O...W UP!

BTW, good luck to Matt Hamill on his fight tonight. It'll come on in 3 hours from now. Don't miss it!


UPDATE: After getting reviews, comments and criticisms I realize as I look back that my tone was indeed overly harsh. I am very supportive of deaf/hh people who are comfortable using their voice to communicate. And I was utterly aghast by those who would go to the distance to try and deny a deaf/hh adult the right to speak and use his voice to communicate. Instead of "grow up" it should've been replaced with the fact that I wished those people would have an open mind instead about adult's choices and rights to use his/her own voice to communicate and doing so the person shouldn't be demonized for doing that at all.

It is amazing to see how a deaf person who can speak well enough to be understood without ever hearing his own voice! It is MY belief that communication preferences are varied among us and we shouldn't demonize no one for their communication choice and preference, even if it means just speaking alone. So, in the end, and I'm big enough to see why people may be upset about my blog piece, I would like to apologize for the improper wordings and tone. As I look back it does look a bit harsh perhaps too much since negative experiences could play a big factor in why one picked "No." However, having said that, I am having trouble over the idea when people use his/her own experience as an excuse to deny other's their own adult's right to use his/her own voice. That simply does not compute.

Lastly, my blog poll piece about the Hamill's use of voice clearly was about those 30% who voted "No. " My blog piece has never been directed at the whole deaf community. Please get that straight, folks. In fact those 30% who voted at this time consisted of only 27 out of 100 participants so far. The 27 people who voted "No" is in no way representative of the larger deaf population. Please keep in mind, my comments were directed at those 27 (and counting) who voted "No" and not against the 900,000 or so Deaf people in the United States. Commenting against those 27 is not the same as scolding the entire deaf community. Please understand the difference here.