New hearing aid style....punkish

I can't exactly say this is the kind of hearing aid people would desire for but I'd give them credit for being this creative. What you're seeing in this photo is a hearing aid. Yes. A hearing aid. Go here and learn more about this really strange idea of a hearing aid design.  If you're hard of hearing and are into this sort of punk-type of jewelry design for your ear...lobes....you might want to try this one out, if you can afford it. I imagine it'd be expensive considering not many would wear it in that fashion.

Unapproachable Deaf People?

Are deaf and hard of hearing people really that "unapproachable" simply because they have a different way of communicating? In some ways I'd say "yes" and in some ways I'd say "no." That would depend on the context of a situation. Let me give you one "unapproachable" example and that would be the Deafhood Foundation organization.  On the outside they look to be very "approachable" but at closer inspection one would began to realize they are quite the opposite. The foundation's mission is:

"....dedicated to achieving economic and social justice for all Deaf people." 

 Now, note the capital letter "D"eaf in their mission statement as they are attempting to convey that word to mean all people with hearing loss, deaf and hard of hearing. But the problem is that the term "Deaf" with the upper case "D" has always denoted to mean culturally deaf people. According to Carol Padden and Tom Humphries, in Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture (1988) explains the meaning and difference between "D"eaf and "d"eaf:

We use the lowercase deaf when referring to the audiological condition of not hearing, and the uppercase Deaf when referring to a particular group of deaf people who share a language – American Sign Language (ASL) – and a culture. The members of this group have inherited their sign language, use it as a primary means of communication among themselves, and hold a set of beliefs about themselves and their connection to the larger society. We distinguish them from, for example, those who find themselves losing their hearing because of illness, trauma or age; although these people share the condition of not hearing, they do not have access to the knowledge, beliefs, and practices that make up the culture of Deaf people.

Some organizations even attempted to change that very definition by inserting "Deaf" into their own bylaws without giving any real definition to it and could easily be construed to mean only culturally deaf people. Over the last three decades Deaf (culturally deaf) people have made it a point that they "own" that word and for it to mean explicitly one thing, a group that uses ASL and have a culture. Nothing more. Nothing less.

But what is obvious here is that 98% of the deaf and hard of hearing population who do not know sign language, who are not affiliated with Deaf culture, and have other preferred means to communicate such as speaking, using Cued speech, listening and speaking, or preferring the use of Signing Exact English, for example. We still have an extremely large majority deaf and hard of hearing population that simply do not sign and they certainly are not "Deaf" people.

Deafhood Foundation is far from approachable because on their main web page it may look inviting except that their Gratitude video is only limited to those who know sign language which leaves the rest of  99.96% of the U.S. population out. So much for "social justice" when they've been demanding that "hearing people" ought to include captioning in their speaking videos. The irony is palpable here. With a signing video there is no way to approach the remaining U.S. audience if captioning isn't being used to convey their message. Not some social gabbing amongst Deaf people but a message they are trying to convey and put out for all to see.  Their own message largely resonates only to those within their own Deaf group rather than to the rest of the 98% of the population of people with hearing loss which numbers around 36,000,000 people. That's a lot of people to ignore when trying to put out a message of unity, acceptance and communication accessibility.


As for "approachable" deaf and hard of hearing people (i.e.. everybody with a hearing loss), they are increasingly using technology to allow themselves to become more approachable by giving them the ability to converse and interact with hearing people in a variety of ways.  Lately I have noticed that more and more deaf/hh people are using captioning technology to include with their own personal videos, this is true among a rising number of Deaf people taking advantage of that technology to spread their message to the rest of the English using U.S. population by using the captioned English language.  A good example of that (i.e. signing deaf) is Barry Sewell's latest video about John Yeh on conveying his message to the rest of the U.S. audience. Another approachable example would be the people who run HLAA whose own donation had already hit the million dollar mark last month since starting in January.

It's not just captioning technology but other technologies like face to face communication technology, and internet relay technology. Something that would allow the ability to interact easily with people and make them approachable. It's not about the competition of ideologies but about acceptance and understanding when it comes to accessible communication for all.

In the end the question becomes are you Frieda, the lovable, vain, unapproachable perhaps angry deaf person or are you one of those people who find a way to make themselves approachable as possible without the need to be so ungainly politically correct?

Gallaudet University's Quiet Climate Change - Part II

This is a second round to my previous blog as I have something else to add. For the longest time I supported the idea of having a robust discussion on climate science.  Because of a politically driven agenda behind the term "climate change" it has become irretrievably tainted as a code word for "anthropogenic global warming" (AGW) rather than as both cooling and warming climates that is part of Earth's natural climate variability.

For this part II blog piece I'd like to continue my discussion of Bill Snape's 2008 video presentation that was presented at Gallaudet University.  He covered the Arctic sea ice in the beginning and presented a graph that showed a downward trend based on 27 years worth of Arctic sea ice data at the 9:46 time mark. He used an Arctic sea ice before and after satellite pictures taken in 1979 and 2007. Funny thing is that he said "30 years later" at the 2 minute mark referring the time difference between the two pictures which should've been "28 years later." The two satellite pictures he presented showed a large expanse of Arctic sea ice in September of 1979 and contrasted that with a much smaller expanse of sea ice in September of 2007 under the heavy pretext that the change in ice expanse was due to man's supposed additional introduction of CO2 into the atmosphere.

At the time of Bill Snape's presentation he had only 28 years worth of continuous satellite imagery and not 50, 100, 200, 500 or 1000 years worth of sea ice expanse data to see the highest and lowest sea ice extent over a longer period of time. It was simply not possible because satellite technology did not exist at the time. We're only seeing a very small window of time spanning a mere 28 years. That's not enough to make any kind of conclusion other than it's all naturally caused rather than man-made (induced). And then he said the most irresponsible thing that any self-respecting scientists would not do and that is to make a factual statement based on a hypothesis using only 28 years worth of sea ice coverage data that the reason for less ice coverage was because of global warming. He didn't say anthropogenic-caused global warming (AGW) but the whole pretext of his presentation is on global warming as caused by human beings. There's no doubt about that one. To the unsuspecting audience watching Bill's presentation they were most likely not aware that 28 years of data do no equate as an irrefutable proof that AGW is the reason when in reality it is much more complex than that with man's contribution hardly being the source.

Let's look at a time lapse video from 1978 to 2009 using that same Arctic sea ice data and you can see the continual contraction and expansion of sea ice over time.



Here's a video time lapse from 2000 to 2009 that's a bit more detailed and clearer.



In Bill Snape's presentation he showed a September 2007 satellite picture showing the Arctic sea ice at its lowest sea expanse. That was 4 years ago. Since then the expanse has not gotten any lower than 2007 if you look at the AMSR-E Sea Ice Extent graph (go here for an enlarged picture).

You can see that after 2007 none of the sea ice extent ever got lower than 2007. There's also NORSEX's graph to look at well.  With 33 years worth of Arctic sea ice data showed a slight downward trend and that's all it is, a downward trend with no idea of what that trend may have looked like prior to 1979 leading up to today. But we can see what it might have looked like prior to 1979 using other sources to gain a better idea.

Before 1969 six ships completed the Northwest Passage when it was ice free at the time. Earlier than that you had Roald Amundsen back in 1903 made his ice-free trip in the late summer month using his 70 foot long wooden fishing boat during his three year trip to find the "holy grail" Northwest Passage. That passage was ice free then when he discovered the route.  It was also ice free in the 1940s.

St. Roch had serviced RCMP posts and Inuit settlements in the western Arctic since 1928, but it is for her epic voyages through the Northwest Passage from west to east between 1940 and 1942, and the return voyage in 1944..

It certainly wasn't ice free some 13,000 years ago when we had glacial ice sheets that extended all the way to the northern parts of the United States (geographically speaking) before it began retreating as Earth gradually warmed up. That's an indisputable fact. Earth has warmed up since then with occasional mini ice ages.
You have historical, archaelogical, and biological examples and evidences so numerous they point to a very warm Medieval period from 1000 to 1300 AD. And that temperatures were estimated as high as 4 degrees Celsius warmer than today. Crops cultivated were done further north in Europe. Tree lines in the Alps were found to have grown 2000 meters higher than today's tree line elevation. Vikings were able to live on Greenland and even grow crops there before the cold climate returned and had to abandon their established settlements (this is true in the northern parts of Norway). Grapes were grown  for wine at one time as far north as southern Norway. Citrus fruits were once grown much further north in Asia than today. All point to a very warm period of time. All documented.

During the Holocene period studies have found trees that grew few hundred miles more north compared to today or that they found trees growing 1500 to 2400 feet higher in elevation in mountainous areas than today. All at a time when CO2 concentration was much, much lower, of course. Or go further back in time you had CO2 concentrations in the 1000 to 2000 ppm range where both plant and animal species thrived on land.

So, in retrospect, I have several concerns about Bill Snape's 2008 presentation to an audience that weren't exactly savvy in the field of science to understand enough the limitations of data and correlation exercises. The warming (and cooling) of Earth is not unprecedented. It has been doing that for hundreds of thousands of years to millions of years, even when you have had natural catastrophic events occur such as volcanic explosions and meteor impacts which created dramatic climatic changes on a global scale in a very short time span.

On a closer time scale we have retreating glaciers of Garibaldi Park in B.C., Canada (map) where retreating glaciers revealed several thousand year old preserved tree stumps with their roots still in the soil. Trees that were once part of an ancient forest. An indication of a time when it was much warmer you had mature forest growing in abundance. The Warren glacier (one of many glaciers in Garibaldi Park) began retreating from it's maximum extent in 1705 over a span of almost 300 years to 2003 with recent photographic evidence starting in 1912.

Glaciers in Garibaldi Park have retreated and advanced several times over the last several thousand years which may be in fact tied to solar activity as an important if not main climate forcing mechanism.

Periods of advance in Garibaldi Park are broadly synchronous with advances elsewhere in the Canadian Cordillera, suggesting a common climatic cause. The Garibaldi Park glacier record is also broadly synchronous with the record of Holocene sunspot numbers, supporting previous research that suggests solar activity may be an important climate forcing mechanism.

Bill Snape, do you know what's scarier? To have an audience that isn't savvy enough to understand the limitation of scientific data and correlation exercises, and who are more easily swayed with cute pictures of polar bears with one person presenting only one side of the story that's theoretical in nature. For example, if you want to talk about correlation then tell me which of the two graphs shows a better positive correlation with global temperature change on Earth.


Picture graphs of correlation of Arctic Temperatures With Solar Irradiance (above) and CO2 (bottom).

Those graphs came from a 2005 study on the effects of solar irradiance on Arctic temperatures (Soon, W.H., "Variable Solar Irradiance as a Plausible Agent for Multidecadal Variations in the Arctic-wide Surface Air Temperature Record of the Past 130 Years," Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 32, 2005) where you can see that there is a much stronger positive correlation between temperatures and solar irradiance than with increasing CO2 concentration over time.

So, where I'm getting at? Well, a lot of things. One is the feeding of scientific information based on a theory such as AGW as if they were factual science and that all scientists have come to a consensus on this (they haven't). It's true that the Arctic sea ice has expanded and contracted seasonally but with only 32 years worth of data we are limited by what we can surmise why a slight downward trend on sea ice extent other than to say it's all part of the natural variability of climate change. It's certainly better than to make a giant sweeping statement saying man has indirectly caused Arctic sea ice or glaciers to retreat all because of a theory and not fact.

Bottom line, Gallaudet University students and staff need to ask real honest and hard questions and not be afraid to raise their hands say, "Excuse me,...." and ask direct, challenging questions and the need for more clarification.

Gallaudet University's Quiet Climate Change

It all began some 4 to 5 years ago at the height of this well known climate fear rippling through the fabric of our easily-duped society ominously known as "Global Warming."  Gallaudet University soon became a part of this movement at the academic level where professors and students excitedly signed about this fearful awesomeness of thermagedon known as "Global Warming."  A term that has changed rather rapidly over the years to become known as "Climate Change" and then progress laughably to "Climate Disruption"......the equivalent of moving the goal post......all within the context of anthropogenic-caused global warming (AGW) even though Earth has not warmed up for 13 years since 1998.

This graph shows that the trend of the last decade is absolutely flat, with no increase at all – though the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have carried on rising relentlessly.

‘This is nowhere near what the climate models were predicting,’ Prof Curry said. ‘Whatever it is that’s going on here, it doesn’t look like it’s being dominated by CO2.’

Something that scientists are increasingly being pressed to admit that this is the case acknowledging global temperature has not risen in 13 years but still attempt to tweak their own reasoning behind the lack of temperature trend increase in favor of the direction of AGW. Such disingenuous attempts.

This "climate disruption" term was first proposed for use in 2010 to replace "climate change." Such a change designed to make it sound increasingly ominous because "climate change" wasn't doing enough to put fear into gullible, fertile public minds.  However, should a cataclysmic volcanic eruption occur, a la Pinatubo or worse Krakatoa, the slamming of a 1/4 mile wide iron-fused meteor into Earth or, god forbid, multiple nuclear warheads going off in different countries then by all means "Climate Disruption" would be appropriately termed for those instances because it would definitely disrupt our climate system in such a catastrophic manner.

The term "climate disruption" was designed in the context of "global warming" (though some scientists continue to deny it's about global warming but about rapid climate change) where human is supposedly the main reason for Earth to warm up (remember, no warming since 1998) rather than attribute to natural variability when humans ultimately have no control of.  Yet some people use even more ominous phrases like "avoid catastrophic climate disruption" like Bill Snape has done last year in May 2010 (fyi, he is the head swim coach at Gallaudet University). Now, it's catastrophic! Thermagedon! This "dangerous" carbon dioxide (CO2) gas in our atmosphere high above us even though CO2 makes up about 0.03% (0.0003) of the total atmospheric gases. The same gas that we exhale everyday. The same gas that green plants absorb it along with water to produce products through photosynthesis, sugar and oxygen, which leave the leaf. In short, we exhale the CO2 while plants absorb the CO2 to make Oxygen, a gas that we need to breath in order to live. But Bill Snape managed to mention "global warming" once, "climate change" twice, and "climate disruption" twice all in the same article he wrote last year.

At the height of Gallaudet University's global warming bandwagon which presumably peaked in 2007 when they made an announcement on joining with Focus the Nation organization in a newsletter (the Dec 17, 2007 newsletter is no longer publicly available except in the Google cache).

Gallaudet students know that climate change is happening every day, but they believe they can reverse the trend. Members of the new student organization Green Gallaudet have already taken a number of actions, from selling reusable shopping bags to becoming part of the effort to make campus buildings environmentally friendly. Now the group, which held its first meeting in September, is planning a marathon day of activities surrounding climate change. Along with over 1,000 other schools and organizations nationwide, Gallaudet will host a Focus the Nation (FTN) teach-in on January 31, bringing dozens of experts to speak about climate change and how Americans can face this challenge.

The students’ concerns are founded in strong evidence. “The rate at which carbon dioxide (CO2) levels are rising is quite alarming,” said Green Gallaudet advisor Dr. Caroline Solomon, an associate professor of biology. She also points out that the increase is clearly tied to humans’ fossil fuel consumption. And it is just recently, during the lifetimes of today’s college students, that the problem has become more severe and garnered more attention. “The rise in global temperatures is having a greater impact than we could have possibly imagined ten years ago,” Dr. Solomon said.

Remember, global temperature has not risen since 1998. And certainly you have the problem of bad temperature data from bad temperature monitoring stations that skews global temperature data upward.

Gallaudet University quietly removed themselves from the Focus the Nation organization (no longer on their map) quickly jumping off of the bandwagon as you can tell below.

Focus the Nation prided themselves with their own apocalyptic prediction back in 2007 at the height of the global warming scare.

"Focus the Nation is exploding because, across the country, educators and students at every high school, college and university understand that we have just a few short years to act decisively to hold global warming to the low end of 3-4 degrees F."

Few short years? Oh my. Their past bleating prediction has now been replaced with a mission statement with no mention of climate change or global warming:

 A just and prosperous clean energy future

I've quietly observed the changes at Gallaudet University over the years when I noticed how they quietly jumped off the climate change bandwagon which probably began around 2009. Bill Snape probably made his last push to turn the tide at a global warming presentation at Gallaudet University signing and talking to students and staff in 2008 as seen in this video commenting on cute polar bears and such.  He also discussed polar bears in a May 2008 interview.

Protecting the Polar Bear

May 2, 2008

Protecting the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act could force the government to take action on global warming and development in the Arctic. Host Bruce Gellerman talks with Bill Snape from the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the plaintiffs who sued the federal government to make a decision about the polar bear...

GELLERMAN: So what legal precedent, if any, does [this listing] set?

SNAPE: Well I think it's very significant that if the polar bear were to be listed, and I think eventually it will be listed, it will be the first major species to be listed as a result of global warming impacts. … Listings under the Endangered Species Act in general should follow a very logical, rational scientific process. It's the Bush administration that has convoluted that process as it relates to the polar bear, because global warming doesn't comport with their notion of truth...

GELLERMAN: So is this about the bears, or is this about prohibiting, you know, invasion of their habitat by oil drilling companies?

SNAPE: Well it's absolutely about the bears, because the bears are doing poorly biologically, but I think the polar bear really is the canary in the coal mine. You're seeing an Arctic ecosystem collapsing...

Polar bear as the canary in the coal mine? Even though polar bears have been around for hundreds of thousands of years even at a time when arctic ice wasn't around? Arctic ecosystem collapsing? What does that supposed to mean?   Polar bears do not always depend on ice for their livelihoods or survival despite their natural ability to swim hundreds of miles in a single swim.

And ignoring the fact that Arctic sea ice extent began its satellite photo size measurement beginning in 1979 which is a mere 30+ years worth of sea ice data of contraction and expansion against the backdrop when the Arctic ocean was ice free (here and here) during the Holocene (past ~11,000 years). Going back further they survived an even warmer period based on DNA from a 110,000–130,000-year-old polar-bear fossil that was successfully sequenced.  Polar bears were around during the Holocene period in abundance and survived man's hunting and changing climate condition which is believed to have caused the extinction of the Wooly Mammoth. Even today the population of polar bears continue to be stable or have increased over the last three or four decades and in no way appears to be endangered at all....certainly not from global warming, natural or otherwise.

Yet with the recent ruling in June 2011 that upheld the endangered species status for polar bears based on the assumption that the arctic ice (which floats on the Arctic ocean and not on land) is "melting away" (hardly the case as sea ice extent remains within the natural variability of ice contraction and expansion) due to anthropogenic global warming as being the main thrust and reason for the polar bears' endangered listing but in reality it's pure politics in play as commented by the Cato Institute.

This is a political, not a scientific act. Polar bears are at or near record population levels today. They clearly survived eras in the past where Arctic climate was warmer than it is now. For several millennia after the end of the last ice age, summer temperatures in the Eurasian Arctic were 4-13°F warmer than modern temperatures. As some summer sea-ice is lost at today's temperatures, it seems likely that it was probably absent during that era. Obviously the polar bear survived, as did the fledgling Inuit culture.

This marks the first instance of a species being listed based upon a computer model of future climate from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). There has been no net warming in the last decade, and scientists recently discovered that it is likely there will be little if any for the next decade. Not one of the IPCC's models includes a two-decade hiatus in global warming. Consequently this listing is based upon obsolete science. This makes the listing of the Polar Bear obviously political and hardly scientific.

I pointed out more than a few times in my blog and elsewhere that Earth's climate is an incredibly complex, not entirely a closed system, and dynamic system involving the atmosphere, land and water whose climate change is at the whim of our nearest star which is our sun. Occam's Razor, what has been obvious all along as theories go has always been in our sun-burned faces.  And with the latest round of Climategate 2.0 where a cache of more than 5,200 email correspondences were made available to the public a few days ago showed collusions between the media, politicians and scientists to promote AGW.  An attempt to purposely deny data to people and scientists and at the same time deny people who question the AGW any necessary media coverages.  This round of emails will certainly help squelch any unnecessary claims of anthropogenic global warming, or in the words of Bill Snape, "catastrophic climate disruption."

Be sure to read Part II.

Thank you for participating. 

Sign Write

The title "sign write" is as best as I can describe a situation and it has to do with an observation I noticed in a discussion forum on a deaf-related topic. There was a hearing parent (of a deaf child) who actually wrote somewhat haltingly in English as if it was done in a signing format. This hearing parent was a new member with English as the native language. So, it's not like it was a 2nd language or anything like that. I thought about using "deaf talk" but that's not right and does it reflect appropriately what I'm trying to get at here.  And so, "sign write" is as close as I can describe correctly this situation about a hearing parent. 

In later threads that parent wrote in a fashion that was grammatically smoother and stayed like that ever since. And so I have this question and I'm wondering about this. Has anyone ever witnessed anything like that before? A new hearing parent in a forum attended by mostly deaf and hard of hearing members to write English in an almost a haltingly manner like "sign write"?

I'm thinking that this parent had this misconception about the forum members' English fluency and thought it was necessary to write in such a way. Your thoughts?

A Day by Day Review

Gosh, it has nearly been 6 years since Chris Muir was inspired by my email to him about Rob McGovern and my cousin, Major Gregory Stone, who was murdered in a grenade tent attack in Kuwait days before the Iraq war to begin. The resulting inspiration of mine was incorporated into Chris Muir's Day by Day cartoon panel as seen above. That was a time early on in my blogging career when I was mostly writing political blogs more so than deaf related blogs.  Going back I can see my transition going from writing mostly politically themed blogs to deafness related blogs. In order to continue with my writing outlet in the area of politics I created Deaf Conservative Republicans blogsite back in November of 2008 with numerous deaf contributors who have contributed their blog pieces.

It's no secret that my blogging career spanned many different blogs that I've created over the years.  As always, my goal and aim were to reach both hearing and deaf readers covering a variety of interest. Other blogs I've created in the past were on my wildland fire fighting stories and pictures, strongman blog in preparation for my upcoming strongman competion, deaf aikido on martial art,  Ragtime Piano! blog, and a blog on a new soon-to-be-developed-one-of-a-kind commercial spaceport in New Mexico (my name is mentioned in a Wikipedia external link section about the spaceport) because of my interest on space and technology, and being so close to it when I lived in New Mexico for several years. BTW, the New Mexico Spaceport is still a few years away from completion.  Most of those blog lasted only a few years with the exception of my Kokonut Pundit and Ragtime Piano! blogs.  Even when hurricane Katrina hit the deaf/hh community hard I was there to try and help deaf/hh survivors find each other which yielded lots of email responses as a show of appreciation when I set up my Deaf Survivors blog. Michelle Malkin promptly recognized my call for help for deaf and hard of hearing survivors of hurricane Katrina. Even then I got criticized by a few Deaf people for having the audacity to help in time of disaster. Incredible boorish people they were.

Just making a day by day observations of my own blogging contribution Just like how the author of his Day by Day cartoon makes his daily observations about daily life full of ironies and hypocrisies. Take some time to visit his site.

Happy Veterans Day to all the U.S. veterans on 11-11-11! We're proud of you!

UPDATE: Got some interesting hits yesterday coming from NYTimes that linked to my Day by Day Review blog. I went and investigated and found my link in a recent NYTimes article.

Voting Illusion in DeafRead

In DeafRead's Extra section there is an opportunity for readers to vote on a blog piece they like. And with enough votes it could go to the main page of DR's aggregator page. I don't care much for votes but I noticed an usual pattern after my blog piece had gotten 2 or 3 votes in the beginning.  Another blog below mine in DR Extra suddenly went 2 or 3 votes higher over mine. Sensing that something is not right simply because Deaf Anthology is linked to a blog with a YouTube video containing no captions. The video contain words that were sung throughout the video. While mine was a fully dedicated Halloween blog.

I figured this was due to a bit of ego factored in only because my blog piece was above the Deaf Anthology's piece in DR Extra and seeing my number go up while Deaf Anthology's stayed behind. Then I started to see a pattern. I asked a few of my friends to vote for my blog piece and I let them know it was an experiment. It didn't take long until I was 1 or 2 votes higher than Anthology's. And it wasn't long also until the number of votes for Anthology to up 1 or 2 votes higher than mine. In no way did I touch or instruct my friends to vote for Deaf Anthology in case you're wondering.

I realized the inherent weakness when it comes to online voting. One person can easily go to Best Buy and go online using their laptop computer displays, or to a phone store with their display notebook laptops with an internet connection, a library computer room, at work, or at a college campus computer room and vote multiple times. Though I didn't go to those places except for my work. And if one has a smart phone with an internet connection, that same person can vote for the same blog article again. Not only that if you have a family then there are probably more laptops to access, including daughters' and/or sons' smart phones if they have one (mine do not).

After November 3rd (first picture at top) I let it alone for a week and saw no changes in votes. On Nov 10th with 16 vs 19 votes I decided to add three more votes (see middle picture) making it 19 vs 18 votes. It wasn't long until Athology's vote went up by three, too, with a vote of 19 vs 20 that same day. The next day Anthology's went up another two votes with 19 vs 22 votes just for good measure I suppose. 

Now, I'm letting people and Tayler Mayer know this because voting can be done multiple times by one person on his/her own blog in DR Extra. I've done this myself along with the help of my friends' help. No big secret or shame in telling you people this. My intention was not to embarrass Tayler Mayer about this. Granted, DR's online voting is not perfect and I realize that. I'm sure Tayler Mayer is already very aware of this shortcoming and realize the possibility of deceitful voting practices in DeafRead Extra.

And, yeah, this is a slow news day for me.

But happy Veterans Day! Thank you for all you have done.


Update: As soon as I blogged this I saw that Deaf Anthology's number of votes jumped up to 23. Congratulations!

UPDATE II: Poor guy, he's deflecting using a fantasy rebuttal. Tsk.

Walk4Hearing reaches pivotal fund raising goal

It took 10 months starting in January of this year the Walk4Hearing to finally reach their fund raising goal of $1.2 million dollars in record time. Money raised will be used toward resources for deaf and hard of hearing people. And why so quickly did it raise so much money in such a relatively short time? Simple. There was no politics mucking things up. No political correctness games. No secret agenda. No contacting employers because of disagreements or purely for hate against a person they don't like. No calling Child Protective Services. No practicing on exclusion.  No leading from behind. No leaving bad taste in people's mouths. No attacking other organizations. With HLAA, everybody is involved and we/they help each other out regardless of communication preferences.

Money raised is shared between the national organization (Hearing Loss Association of America) and local Walk sites.

Examples of how funds are used include:

National Programs

• Advocating for the rights of people with hearing loss
• Information, referral, education and coping resources through www.hearingloss.org, the Hearing Loss Magazine, the annual HLAA Convention, and the HLAA electronic newsletter
• A nationwide network of 200 chapters providing personal support
• 14 state organizations advocating for expanded state services
• Support for parents of children with hearing loss at www.kidsandhearingloss.org
• Outreach to veterans returning with hearing loss
• Social networking site for young adults with hearing loss at www.hearinglossnation.org

Local Programs

• Captioning and hearing assistive technology at chapter meetings to make them accessible
• Scholarships for students with hearing loss towards college tuition
• Funding for hearing aids and devices for people who cannot afford them
• Installation of hearing assistive technology in public places
• Captioning of live theater productions
• Seminars on coping with hearing loss for families

Congratulations to Walk4Hearing on their successful fund raising effort. I'm sure money will be put to good use.

Just watch me

In the world of business there are so many people out there who will tell you that you can't succeed. But what some of them will do is they turn around and say, "Just watch me!" And succeed they do. Because if people can succeed because of a product then success will be his and the company's.

Deaf Zombie Walk 2011

Aaargghh! They are alive! Er...dead! Um, well, they're deaf zombies practicing their zombie walk for charity at the 2011 Flint Zombie Walk.

Deaf Zombies Invade Halloween!

Happy Halloween and welcome to the night of the deaf zombies. Be wary of mindless deaf zombie professors roaming the haunted hallways of schools seeking fresh brains and flesh for they are bereft of it. Once sane professors of higher learning succumbed to the ravages of the zombie virus leaving them as mindless zombie professors yearning for real fresh brains for some reason.  Like this one here.

But people continually ask do deaf zombies exist? Where are they? Why aren't they included? That's the real question on Halloween night. Yet we see evidence of deaf zombies roaming aimlessly unaware of their very own empty existence but a desire for fresh flesh to sustain their ravenous appetites.



In the end of the video the professor gets attacked by his own deaf zombie students who will soon join the mindless cadre of deaf zombies. Call that irony.  But do we see evidence of deaf zombie professors? Yes! They do exist!

Be careful of them. Zombiehood isn't exactly a desirable trait to have when your brain turns to Swiss cheese.

Happy Halloween! Boo!

If you want a real scare next year, be sure to visit the Nightmare Factory at Oregon School for the Deaf located in Salem. A haunted entertainment with the help of the popular tv show Extreme Makeover (see video of that show here).



DISCLAIMER: Zombies do not exist. They are fictional imagination of the human mind despite the rising popularity of zombies in movies, tv shows, games and haunted showings and it being a $5.7 billion dollars a year business enterprise. All zombie characters in this blog and videos are in fact real human beings playing as zombies. Of course, you knew that. Right?

Anybody for Zombie Monopoly game for some mindless fun? I promise you it won't cost you $656 dollars. 

Successful Deaf/HH Entrepreneurs

Successful deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs. The numbers are few and far in between but they are out there if you look hard enough. What gets me excited is seeing successful, legitimate, ethical businesses run by deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs whether they know sign language or not. It becomes an even greater excitement if you personally know someone running a successful business and watched it grow from the very beginning. I don't say this often or make it apparent but there is a certain satisfaction on seeing deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs struggle after many years of hard work, the long hours they put in coming to fruition on the horizon and beyond when their businesses finally take off in a big way.

That's the American dream. But it ain't all that easy.

Approximately 50 percent of new businesses go out of business within 5 years in a good economy. The reason for failure is many.  It's even harder for deaf and hard of hearing owned businesses to survive beyond the first 5 year and I would consider a company a success if they survive beyond the 5 year magic mark.  Though nowadays it's harder still for any businesses to survive in our current recession economy when everybody is cutting back to save money.  So, it was a nice surprise seeing an article when RIT/NTID their first Deaf Entrepreneurs Roundtable Panel discussion last year in the effort to help uncover keys to successful deaf entrepreneurship.

The panel discussion, “Deaf and Hard of Hearing Entrepreneurs—Living the Dream,” explored a multitude of issues related to deaf entrepreneurship. The panel consisted of eight deaf and hard-of-hearing entrepreneurs from around the country who shared their keys to success and explained some of the challenges that they encountered along the way.

With the advantage of technology today communication is made possible between entrepreneurs regardless of communication preference as they share many common grounds than not. It's a great idea to bring together deaf and hard of hearing entrepreneurs to discuss ways to survive running a business and make it a successful one.  By learning from each other businesses can leverage those knowledge to better compete in a tough market dominated mostly by hearing people and businesses. So, it's hard to get the deserved recognition.

A coveted spot for any new businesses would to be featured in INC Magazine top 500 fastest growing private company. Although very, very few deaf or hard of hearing owned businesses ever get featured in INC Magazine such as Keen Guides whose owner was one of the RIT/NTID Deaf Entrepreneurs Roundtable Panel members in 2010. One key to recognizance is for a business to be a "game changer." You have a particular technology or business model that fits what it appears to be a niche market but only to find out it's really a much bigger market once the idea takes off by fulfilling a demand. Inclusivity is the key in many business models in the deaf/hh -owned businesses. Inclusivity is a rather large market need to fill when you have 36 million people with hearing loss in the United States who typically do not have the same type of access and enjoyment that hearing people have.

Company: Keen Guides In 2004, Catherine McNally — deaf since she was 8 months old — was at a museum and asked for an alternative to the audio tour… only to be handed a 50-page manuscript. Talk about an “aha” moment. Today, her company makes mobile tours available on iTunes that use captions and American Sign Language; there are currently 136 tours available in Seattle, New Orleans and the Washington, DC, area, among others. While funding is pending, McNally is charging full-speed ahead with plans to reach 1,111 sites across the US by November.

The Message: “I am using my work to bring greater awareness for inclusive accessibility in cultural tourism,” McNally says. www.keenguides.com.

This is what I've always advocated, the need for inclusiveness for all people, deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people regardless of communication preference.  There is no feeling of inclusiveness when you watch a video that isn't captioned or subtitled (that can be done by capable people and without much effort versus those who refuse on ideological grounds) and instead gets handed a transcript of that video whether it's done with voice or sign language. There are a few deaf and hard of hearing businesses that I'm aware of who had that "Ah ha" moment and decided to make a business out of it. A time when everything makes sense to risk it because no one else thought of it before on the need to make it work. What makes many deaf and hard of hearing owned businesses successful is their fulfillment of the need for deaf and hard of hearing customers and clients to feel included because they know exactly how they feel.  And that, my friends, is a potential multi-billion dollar market place with 36 million people with hearing loss in the United States.  The question is, how can you tap into that potential?

Hiding behind the "entertainment" claim

Interesting blog piece but yet again an overtly (and obvious) personal one under the guise as being simply a fictional, "entertainment" blog piece. And the obvious effort to twist the story a bit under the guise as a "fictional story." Strange, huh?  I've addressed this before in a similar vein. Others have addressed it as well recognizing such writings as personal in nature simply because of the nature of targeting individuals under the guise as an "entertainment venue."  

Deafread is an aggregator site and not explicitly for "entertainment purposes" as people should already know. The owners developed DeafRead as a way to allow everyone a voice, including mine, for those who sign up.

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. 

I am one of those voices. They make a key point in Deafread about the purpose of its aggregator, note the bold.

An aggregator simply gathers posts; it does not mean we support or reject the content within each post. We don't censor blogs based on the bloggers' opinions. We publish everything as long as it is deaf-related and satisfies the guidelines. 

So, this "Deaf Anthology" blog appears to satisfy Deafread's guidelines. And that's fine. At least have the cojones to admit that what was written was essentially personal in nature instead of hiding behind a disclaimer that blogs written were simply fictional in nature or for "entertainment venue". Deaf Anthology, if you have an actual, real, bonafide complaint, then take it up with Deafread.

UPDATE: Again, if you have a real, bonafide complaint, take it up with Deafread instead of relying on fictional blogs. Secondly, understand that Deafread never made any promise of taking anyone to some "promise land" but rather an aggregator site to give voice to all sides. Plus, they even put up a disclaimer.

"DeafRead does not endorse any of the blogs by the mere act of publishing."

 Learn to agree to disagree.

Thought of the day: Double standards

There is no "anti-deafhood." Just that we have no interest in such a concept and certainly don't care for these fanaticism and pushiness by means of peer pressure in order to get people to conform to their DH. They play the games of double standards. Their words betray their actions. And their actions betray their words. We prefer to accept diversity as it is and keep things simple without all of the utter nonsense.

MTVU at Gallaudet - the next brouhaha..ha ha?

It was an interesting beginning episode of the new MTVU tv reality series "Quiet Campus: Welcome to Gallaudet." Four Gallaudet University students introduced themselves in the show.  All of them came from mainstreamed schools. Two of them were strongly oral, a third one a late deafened student who lost her hearing while as a hearing child due to chemotheraphy who described herself as "deaf with a splash of hearing," and a fourth one described himself as a gay latino with "three strikes against him" (i.e. deaf, gay and latino). It was a nice video introduction and a way to show the world what Gallaudet University is like. Although there seems to be a bit of mild "brouhaha" going on with the complaint that the show was missing a "culturally Deaf ASL-using students be a part of the cast." Sure, why not. Although I'm not making a big deal out of it. Nor am I making a big deal of Taylor who described herself as "deaf with a splash of hearing" (i.e. hard of hearing). She's simply being with herself. I've no desire to make any kind of judgement against her or the cast based on their upbringing or what school they went to. Or how they describe themselves as. They are students of Gallaudet University and are representatives of that school and the Deaf community. Also, just because a deaf person went to a mainstreamed school does not necessarily mean they're not culturally deaf. A lot of that depends on their background and their primary means of communication among themselves.

Perhaps people should be asking the hard questions. Who did MTVU consult with at Gallaudet University about the selection process for their new reality show? Somebody inside at Gallaudet University administration had to know about the upcoming MTVU show beforehand before giving their approval. Was there any consultation at all? Were recommendations given on how to select the students? Who were involved? How were the cast members selected by MTVU? What were the criteria for the selection? And so on. Instead of targeting those four students who described themselves as mainstream students at one time.

Double Dog Dare You!

It is just fascinating to hear comments every now and then through the grapevines that gets filtered down to me in my emails about the few Deaf people who continually dismiss me as someone who is supposedly angry at the Deaf community for "not accepting me." Or that I'm "lonely" which is funny because whenever I opine strongly or present facts on certain deaf-related issues in my blogs (or vlogs) do they resort to this sort of low ball approach of attacking instead of making cogent arguments. Whenever a loss for words they go for the guns and call me an "extremist" something ..something.. whatever. It's like them playing the race card over and over and over because that is  their only response they have left in the cards thinking it's a cogent argument.

Deaf community does not accept me?

How droll and laughable that argument has become lately.

Why? Well, looking back it's funny because the term "Deaf community" has always meant the culturally deaf community. That has always been the defined framework for years in the attempt to instill that message so far ingrained it can only mean "culturally deaf people" (Padden, Carol; Tom Humphries (1988). Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture) and nothing else.

Nowadays you have some Deaf people trying to move the goal post in their desperate bid to concoct a new meaning of the term "D"eaf as to also include people with all kinds of hearing loss whether they are hearing aid users, cochlear implant users, oral deaf, SEE users, cued speech users, late deafened (and not "latened" deaf, folks!), implantable hearing aid users, and anybody with mild to profound hearing loss. In other words, their newly made up term "D"eaf people would apply to the 36 million people with hearing loss in the United States. Using the argument that I am "angry" because the "Deaf community" hasn't accepted me becomes even sillier worthy of a joke or two. It simply becomes a losing argument! Wait til I show this to my Deaf, deaf, hh and hearing Facebook friends and fans of my blog and ask them why they have not "accepted me" for who I am.

Note the sarcasm.

Let's suppose they keep the original intended meaning of the term "D"eaf that Deaf people have
worked so hard to define over the last 25 years (see Padden, Carol; Tom Humphries (1988). Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture) to mean "culturally deaf people" and apply that term in "Deaf community" with all of its intended meaning.

We use the lowercase deaf when referring to the audiological condition of not hearing, and the uppercase Deaf when referring to a particular group of deaf people who share a language – American Sign Language (ASL) – and a culture.  The members of this group have inherited their sign language, use it as a primary means of communication among themselves, and hold a set of beliefs about themselves and their connection to the larger society.  We distinguish them from, for example, those who find themselves losing their hearing because of illness, trauma or age; although these people share the condition of not hearing, they do not have access to the knowledge, beliefs, and practices that make up the culture of Deaf people.

 Fine. Except that using the same argument that I am "angry at the Deaf community" for not
"accepting me" fails miserably as well because it would indicate a "members only" mentality based on sign language and culture. I have many Deaf friends (old and new ones, even the ones from NTID) that I keep track of in my Facebook and Deaf people I don't know well enough who simply accept and support me for who I am. They are part of the Deaf community. In other words, I see no evidence of their rejection of me.  In all actuality, the whole rejection notion comes from the very few Deaf people who simply have a beef with me and don't like me. Pretty straight forward and obvious. Heck, even Tayler Mayer doesn't reject me and that's a whole lotta Deaf community behind him with his DeafRead and DVTV communities which continues to grow and thrive despite the failed walkout.

Bottom line, we simply accept each other for who we are. I feel no rejection from the "Deaf community" as a whole, folks. Sorry to disappoint the few "unfans."

If that's not the "Deaf community" context in mind then perhaps it's using the "Gallaudet University as the Deaf community" argument since I did go there from 1988 to 1991 in only 3 1/2 short years graduating with a bachelor degree in mathematics. Even using that argument fails on so many levels because a good portion of my Deaf friends were the ones I met while at Gallaudet University. Heck, I even got kudos from Deaf people sitting in the audience (and on the panel) after I did my verbal speech presentation at the first ever blog/vlog (see video of my presentation at 1:25 to 1:42 with an ASL interpreter) conference at Gallaudet University, including comments in my blog offering praise and kudos from the very people in the Deaf community.  It was an honor that Jill Bradbury at Gallaudet University selected me along with several other bloggers/vloggers to attend the conference. She left an astute comment in my blog about diversity.

Mike - I thought it took a lot of confidence to stand up and speak during your panel. By doing so, you helped the conference make a strong statement about embracing diversity in the deaf community. Waving hands! At dinner someone said to me that you are supporting the deaf community in a really valuable way through your interest in technology. Thanks for keeping us informed! Jill.Bradbury | 02.04.07 - 1:28 pm |

It's all about embracing diversity. I accept people with hearing loss regardless of their background, regardless of whether they know sign language or not. The same goes on their acceptance of me for who I am regardless of my communication preferences or background. I just go about a different way of interacting with people of various backgrounds and communication preferences. Something that few seem to not understand.

It's one thing to disagree with a person's opinion but an entirely another realm of fantasy to use a piss poor claim of my being "angry" because the Deaf community "rejected" me as a substitute argument.  Having several Deaf people who don't like me or reject me do not make a "Deaf community."

Gawrsh! *kicks a pebble*

This whole blog piece was precipitated when I looked back on some old comments that were a few years old on somebody else's blog. A few Deaf people actually  "double dog" or "triple dog" dared me to sign in my own video believing I couldn't sign and I was simply a helpless ol "orally." And, of course, the rest was history once I did that. But then they complained even more because of my opinionated signed vlogs both in the signed and spoken format (along with my own subtitles).  Got to laugh at the irony when it comes to diversity and accessibility. How about if I do a "double dog" dare to those same people and ask them to add subtitles in their own signed vlogs? No, make that a triple dog dare! I bet dollars to donuts they won't.

A Poll: How much money you are willing to spend on technology for better work potential?

For deaf and hard of hearing people, how much money are you willing to spend on technology to ensure a better career path, business opportunities and/or promotion potential?

Transgressing the hate and negativity

It was interesting to watch Ryan Comerson's uncaptioned video "Transgressing the Object: The Laboratory" about, ironically, education (i.e. pedagogy). I say ironically because his video wasn't captioned and noting he was only willing to reach out to the potential 0.05 percent of the U.S. population in his effort to "educate" people by sharing his opinions to those who may be interested on such issues. And by reaching out to the interested group which would drop the potential number down to perhaps 0.01 percent (0.0001) of the U.S population, namely the many in the Deaf community. 

Back to topic.

Each person's experience is different. My upbringing was based on positive reinforcement and support from my parents that helped make the optimistic person today. I believe there are always something better or something good that will come out of our own experiences and learn when things do not work as expected. I've also learned to be patient because results take time, even if it means taking a lifetime to see the end result.

Growing up I've never liked people with pessimistic attitudes. I noticed when people behave like that, they generally feel insecure about themselves and tend to lash out at people succumbing to their own emotions and use words as their weapons.  Sometimes subconsciously find ways to drag other people down to their level thinking "If I'm feeling negative, others should, too." The key lay in growing up in a good household with a good positive, parental support system in place. Sure there were negative experiences but the key is that positive experiences outweigh the negative helping to instill those optimistic attitudes. It is also good to be the non-conformist peppered with independent and critical thinking skills. Having said that, I'm not discounting those whose own experiences were much different from mine that could have been much more drastic. I'm just pointing out that laying a good positive foundation is key for a more optimistic approach in life instead of living the life as a "drama queen" at every stage of his or her life passing out ad hominems like candies on Halloween night. Whenever I see that happens, it makes me wonder on just how happy or satisfied they are with their life.  Even to the point of screeching "Where is OUR money going?" having the audacity and pure ego to think all money donated to deafness organizations ought to be going to "Deaf-centered" organizations because it's "OUR" money. Oh, really? Not saying that Commerson is that person or doing that. He has the right to opine in his own way with some valid points but the problem is the heavy wet blanket conspiracy to lay blame at everything that moves instead of acknowledging and holding accountable some of their own actions. The conspiratorial flag can be seen waving prominently in the first paragraph of his part II article when he wrote a mouthful:

The white supremacist audist capitalist patriarchy education-as-a-banking system hegemony has long since incapacitated our children.

I understand the need to buck the system once in awhile but I just have a different approach and see things differently rather than laying it on thick such pessimistic attitudes laced with the "woe-is-me" approaches. That's just me. I like positive boot-strappers who strive for inclusiveness. But I think what Commerson was trying to say in one part of his video is the need to challenge the educational system by giving greater power to over to students and encourage them to develop their own critical thinking skills.  A need to develop and think for themselves. Sure, and I agree. I asked a LOT of questions when I was a kid at school and never once did teachers stop me from asking those questions. We were encouraged to do so. People need to ask questions and think for themselves rather than pay homage in a prostrate position bowing to people without thinking (i.e. gullible). Today, that's exactly what I'm doing now in my blog by thinking for myself using the power of critical thinking. However, the problem seems to be he is essentially blaming everything as the source of the problem without going into details as to why, which ones, and how exactly but in glossed over generalities.

Ryan Commerson used a quote from Paulo Freire, who wrote "Pedagogy of the Oppressed":

“One cannot expect positive results from an educational or political action program which fails to respect the particular view of the world held by the people. Such a program constitutes cultural invasion, good intentions notwithstanding.”

I find it quite ironic when Freire noted that one cannot expect positive results from an education or political action program in terms of hegemony because whenever people reach a certain level of power and control they may find themselves doing the same thing to other people when given the chance. We see hegemony in all walks of life, including some in the Deaf community as a subset of a larger culture on practicing oppression. The key is to have a more open society approach than a closed one because technology continues to increasingly close the communication gaps between deaf, hard of hearing and hearing people.

With my own independent, critical thinking approach I see differently the views on a variety of sensitive topics on deafness which has earned me much scorn from some Deaf people only because I'm the guy who usually throws a monkey wrench into their way of thinking. Instead of agreeing to disagree do they resort to openly call me names thinking its a winning argument. I've been shown pictures of the double bird shots with the crossed eye looks aimed at me on their own blogsite only to have it quickly taken down which was an indication that their arguments were purely based on emotion rather than approaching it from the view as a hearty debate.

I've said several years ago at the beginning of my blog in 2004 moving forward that technology would be the key to help close that communication gap with hearing people and provide alternative approaches to those who may have a different look on what deaf/hh people are capable of. I repeated my technology mantra during my verbal speech (see my video at time stamp from 1:25 to 1:42 with ASL interpreter) at Gallaudet University's vlog/blog conference in early 2007 and how technology could help easily spread and preserve sign language. I still believe it's true today that technology is key to our own separate individual successes such as CART, implantable hearing aids, cochlear implants, digital hearing aids, face to face communication technologies, video phone on laptops, video phone on cell phones, email, blogs, vlogs, remote interpreters, speech to text capabilities on smart phones for non-texters,  ASL interpreters (relay calls) via smart phones, more CC shows, easier capability to add subtitles to your own videos, speech to text recognition on videos (e.g. YouTube), including more FM induction loops in public places, and many more down the road not yet seen developed or incorporated widely. I'm the ever so optimistic person with never a dour moment. In order to educate people, one must remain positive. The moment you go dour and go negative by making it personal is the moment when judgement gets clouded.

I've always believed that the best voice to show to the world is simply to show the end result of what we're capable of rather than resort to attacking individuals, companies, or organizations and make it personal. Leaders need to lead and be accommodating to others and hold to a higher ethical standard when it comes to accountability instead of hiding behind the facade of "leading from behind" that serves only as crutch and an excuse.

Leading from behind....

The phrase "leading from behind" essentially means to let others do the work or "thrive" and thus allow the "leader" to abrogate certain responsibilities and, most importantly, have less accountability when the crap finally hits the fan. We have seen this happen again and again seen in email exchanges, YouTube videos, Facebook, blogs, community forums, school gatherings, and so on. Such certain "leaders" in the Deaf community who insist they are not leaders but are merely "leading from behind" face a conundrum when many followers see them as leaders of their community. They look up to them for guidance and sense of responsibility from them.

Yet, we've seen the consequences of "leading from behind" by encouraging others do the dirty works. We've seen what happens when people were encouraged or suggested at the behest of their "leaders" to call on CPS on other people they don't like, call their employers, or provide sensitive information online for the public to see in order to harass and intimidate people for having alternative opinions because of their blogs or vlogs, or simply having a strong opinion of things that goes against their very grain.  There's a danger in allowing that to happen when you have groups of people running amok you cannot control. Having no control as result of "leading from behind" gives those "leaders" free and clear accountability but yet followers still follow their every words.  Never having the need to issue apologies for any misunderstanding or miscommunication. Never needing to apologize on the followers' behalf for such transgressions. Never having the humility to apologize to others when fault is clearly seen. 

"Leading from behind" from a social aspect is simply a crutch to avoid any accountability and responsibility to those who follow. It becomes an ego of mass proportion. We can only sit in amazement on how certain events have continually unfold before us over the years because of that so-called "leadership role" but in actually it has become a leaderless movement with no accountability built in. 

Members of DVTV

Seems like there's a misconception about the word "members" by a few people out there and what it means when used in the form like "members of DVTV." There's a YouTube video floating around (won't say who in order to save this guy some embarrassment) where one guy tries to explain by saying "I'm a member of DVTV" is incorrect and proceeded to explain because "member" means you pay to be a part of a club or group. Well, I'm sorry but there is no such thing the term "member" means payment is required in order to become a member. The word "member" does not imply a payment of any kind in order to become a "member." No such thing. It simply means that a person belongs to a group, a club, political party or an organization. Any joining of a group or such means you become a member of that group. There are membership fees in order to become a member. Or one can join a group and become  a member of that group and not pay anything.  You are born as a member of your family, for example. Or a member of a political party, a high school band, a clan, a tribe, a "no girls allowed tree house club," and so on.

And so by saying "member of DVTV" or "members of DVTV" is absolutely appropriate (and correct) to describe membership of an organization or a group. To the person in question, you might want to remove that video or else a double face palm will be the result.

A professional patriotic purveyor of highly entertaining and informative blogging

Sometimes you have to laugh on what goes on in some deaf people's minds when it comes to even the simplest of things in my own blogs such as the word "purveyor" seen at the top of my blog.

Kokonut Pundit, a nationally known professional patriotic purveyor of highly entertaining and informative blogging.

For those who don't know, "purveyor" is defined as "a person or business that sells or provides something" such as "a purveyor of kitchen supplies." The word "purveyor" is a noun. In my blog I provide highly entertaining and informative blogging. The noun "purveyor" stems from the word "purvey" which means "to make available" or "to supply or provide (something) for use" such as to "purvey information." It's a verb. I am a purveyor of highly entertaining and informative blogging. In short, I provide highly entertaining and informative blogging.

Remember, kiddies, "purveyor" is a noun that describes a person who "purveys" (a verb) or provides something.

For example, my phrase was borrowed (and modified slightly) from one of my favorite ragtime website (I love playing ragtime piano, of course) whose own phrasing goes like this:

"Professional Patriotic Purveyor of Pianistic Pyrotechnics"

I loved the quirky and funny phrasing so much that I modified it to suit my blog. It'd be awfully silly (not to mention extremely stupid) to conclude that "purveyor" means "to lie" when in fact "purveyor" is a noun to begin with.  The "lie" charge came from this dictionary on "purveyor" thinking it means to "spread lies" which is not the case since the key thing is a person's action (verb) that describes the person's doing such as "spreads," "repeats" or "sells";

 purveyor [pəˈveɪə]

n

1. (often plural) a person, organization, etc., that supplies food and provisions

2. a person who spreads, repeats, or sells (information, lies, etc.)

3. a person or thing that habitually provides or supplies a particular thing or quality a purveyor of humour

4. (Historical Terms) History an officer providing or exacting provisions, lodging, etc., for a sovereign

I spread, provide or repeat information in my blogs. In short, I purvey information, opinions, and even funny commentaries in my blogs.

Now, somebody seriously needs to go back and re-take English 101. But I'm sure somebody out there will soon enough get inspired by the word "purveyor" and twist it some more out of hate or malice. If not, maybe a simple inspiration would be the result. Who knows? Let the fun begin!

Seven year anniversary of Kokonut Pundit

Tomorrow, on October 22, 2011, will be my 7th anniversary for my Kokonut Pundit blog. Seven years of continuous blogging. This blog is blog number 1,880. Last year's anniversary I had 1,609 blogs. This year's anniversary will have a count of 1,880 blogs. That's 279 blogs later, an increase over 198 blogs I did from 2009 - 2010, increasing my average to 0.75 blog/day. With those numbers in place I can say with confidence that I'm the one of most prolific deaf/hh blogger around with Kokonut Pundit being the most blogged blogsite ever for a deaf/hh blogger. And the most long lived deaf/hh blogger as well who continuously blogged since October 2004 (with one break lasting 4 months or so). No other deaf/hh blogs come close on the number of blogs I've produced nor the staying power.

Tomorrow Kokonut Pundit will enter its 8th year. I'm looking forward to new milestones such as my 2,000th blog and my one millionth hit with 71,000+ hits to go as seen on my Sitemeter (currently at 928,000+ hits).  Year 2005 and 2006 were big years for me on the number of hits upping my number quite substantially because of links to my blogs from well known political bloggers. Those were exciting times. It's been fun and I continue to blog the many stories and opinions of mine whether it relates to deafness issues or opinions of the day. I like to thank the readers and visitors who enjoy reading my blogs made this possible. Keep coming. And thank you! 

I would like to take the time to dedicate this blog to my mother-in-law who passed away yesterday after an extended illness. She never read my blog but her soul lives on in heaven with her son, Kevin. Bless her soul and wonderful memory.