Deaf.read has its critics, it was bound to happen if there was a more inclusive approach of the real variations of deaf and others we are. Deaf.read reflects or tries to, that majority, who mostly aren’t cultural, but this is surely not news to cultural deaf ? they have always been a minority.

They must choose whether to be part of the wider areas of hearing loss or go their own way, as it was always the case more deaf means wider views on things. You just have to stand your ground. Your blog is still your domain, if you do not want to read audistic-based blogs or medical ones, then is not the option there to ignore them ? There are bloggers I will ignore.

One needs to follow the reason sites like this exist,is because the ‘cultural’ ones of yore, closed down opinion to a large extent and operated the deaf space, as a ‘closed shop’, It was always the case they were going to have to defend that once others were allowed the same platform..

Whatever deaf.read is or isn’t I’m positively envious the Brits have nothing like it.

I am not going anywhere. I will still be vlogging and blogging right here. And what I say will always be accessible to you here. Debate is fine, but I think it’s time for Deaf people to have the opportunity to present THEIR (cultural) view of what being Deaf is. The medicalized/noncultural view is prevalent everywhere. CI users basically have a safe place everywhere. We just want to create our own opportunity to create our message without having it muddled by the presence of those who do not share that message.

Val –

It has been a long time since I heard from you too. And yes, I think setting up a Deaf-centered aggregator can be similar in idea to a Republican or Democratic magazine — a specific perspective geared toward those who want to see or learn about that specific perspective.

As for Sorenson, or other companies, we should consider boycotting those which promote or perpetuate audism as well. For example, we have the option of using Convo.tv which is Deaf-owned.

That is one of the beauties of living in this country, the fact that you are allowed to publicly state what you beleive in, but in a sense, it will also cause further division in the deaf community when the reality is that I would like to see more unity. I do realize I cannot control other people’s belief’s nor wil I try to forcefully control other people beliefs but lets look at the entire picture here.

You need to realize that there are people out there that try to have their cake and eat it. For example, you say you dont agree with how DR`and DVTV make their profits the way they do because they support audism, that brings up a question here.

Based one what you have said here, what’s your opinion here on other companies that may do what you have explained here, but you have not been publicly outspoken against them, for example, Sorenson VRS?

deafies are not entitled to expect that Deafies turn their sites into a psuedo villages that pay lip service to Deaf Culture [meaning they don't give a fuck about anything other than their latest implant updates or hearing aid accessories or how to lip read a vagina in the dark!]

I use hearing aids and speak, and I sign. More to the point, know just how fucking boring all these posts abt hearing technologies are…… I’m ready to open shark infested beaches for their enjoyment!

It projected a secular approach and not an inclusive one. I don’t agree with signed TV with no access, especially ASL as I live in the UK ! it does nothing to break down barriers either, when the vids are used to attack other bloggers, yes it goes on there too, I saw two having a go at me a few months ago…. they need to be aware I may not understand all ASL, but I Know my name in it ! So how are you going to address signed vids that do that ? It is surely not fair we attack the ASL user or they us with deliberate witholding of means to know what is said.

This deprives other deaf of getting the cultural viewpoint, and assuming the worst. Unless you take on what you see as audism where you feel it is existing, then opting out is addressing nothing, what we call a notice board in the UK !

I know you like to get your teeth into a decent debate and issue, if you just form an area where it is totally banned and include all sorts of isms banned too, then you are going to get no input but yes people, that killed OFF aggregates here, the UK now has none. The deaf space is over, the internet did that.

At present what you propose sounds a bit like the spanish inquisition… People will not know what to post or how. Bang goes your free speech… We have to discuss, oralism, sexism, audism whatever, to ignore it, just makes us look unable to counter, and unwilling to listen to anyone else’s viewpoints.

I can only say that this only worked 10 years ago, it has no chance of working now. It is not good that deaf retreat to own areas, rather than stand their ground. The problem with the American Audism thing, is it is out of control and no longer is oralist or hearing specific it is applied to anyone that isn’t in the deaf culture, that, has contributed to more audism than there perhaps may have been, they drew a line, and people don’t like lines.

The blogger is totally responsible for that takes part on their blog, we have the control and can use it, where there are bloggers who won’t, the deaf.read is the last word or should be. We’ve all had abuse via deaf.read, as I understand it, Taylor is unwilling to remove a blogger because of what takes place in the comment sections, where all the abuse usually takes place.

You may be right deaf.read needs to be more pro-active in warning bloggers who allow them to be used as platforms of abuse, I rather fear the Americans are trapped by their own reluctance to ban because of the free speech thing, as I put on my blog, you abuse me or anyone else there you are zeroed, and I don’t care how that is seen, that is me trying at least to protect other deaf who may log in to my blogs.

I also know how to counter claims I can’t take critisicms too which they try to use ! I have list of people who CANNOT comment on my blog, the reasons I gave to deaf.read at one point as to why. Including multi-posting in comment areas via a different Addy and promoting abuse against themselves even to force the comment section to become farcical. One even mimicked my Addy and went on to abuse others using it… they were caught out because they were too stupid to cover their tracks… or just didn’t care.

With the CI User forced to do their own aggregates, and deaf signers doing their own vids, and you suggesting am anti-ism based input, it all looks very negative for finding common ground, we will end up factionalised all over again. We’ll end up with an aggregate each……

If I want post a story about how I use my new hearing aids to improve my music listening experience on your new site, are you going to disallow my posting?

If you disallow my posting, should I maybe write the National Association for the Deaf and cancel my membership and get my money back?

Because doing that would be the logical end point, should I employ your reasoning.

And don’t tell me about audism. I was mainstreamed in 1960 without hearing aids. Got one in 1965, pitifully weak by today’s standards. I finally made some Deaf friends in 1978 or so and my life was enriched thereby.

Anyway, good luck with your “formal rules.” You’ll wind up being more exclusive than inclusive.