Baaaaaad Idea, John Egbert!
So… John Egbert is proposing that we ban deficit [sic] thinkers from DeafRead.com.
Edmund Burke, an Irish philosopher in the 1700’s said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” And so, after reading your post, John… I cannot stay silent any longer.
After I read your blog post proposing that we ban some blogs, I was, and still am livid. Never did I think you would go that far. But I suppose I should have seen it coming, from various blog posts and personal correspondence with you and your friends.
I cannot think of anything more unAmerican and hypocritical than your spurious proposal. How dare you? Not only does that violate the First Amendment of the United States Bill of Rights, but you and your friends, all proponents of Deafhood, are constantly preaching that the Deaf Community has to have open dialogue so we can grow.
Yet, you want to censor people who has the audacity to disagree with you and your friends? Was that really your idea, or did that come from your friends? I wonder…
So who do you want banned? Just who, exactly, are the “deficit” thinkers? A Deaf person who has a hearing spouse? A Deaf person who learned ASL at a late age? A Deaf person who wears a Cochlear Implant? A Deaf person who has the nerve to disagree with you about Deafhood and what it means? A Deaf person who disagrees with your groupthink?
And tell me something, John… how will banning blogs that you don’t like, help us Deaf readers, to further develop our critical thinking and analysis skills? How will we be able to raise our level of discourse if we’re always agreeing with each other? Hmm? How is that being respectful of diversity like you and your friends are always preaching about?
And how is your ban proposal any different than AG Bell censoring information on American Sign Language? Because to me, there’s absolutely no difference.
You want to dictate what goes on DeafRead? You want to practice censorship on the very thing that gave us our long deserved right – the right to independently practice our freedom of thought and expression?
39 Comments
Comments are closed.
John F. Egbert said,
December 16, 2007 at 10:39 pm
I have no biased ideology. I am not against CI, oral method, hearing spouse.
It is this one person that don’ t have constructive dialogue and likes to bash and smear good people that care about the needs of Deaf Babies.
I am not what you think I am
John
C said,
December 16, 2007 at 10:48 pm
DP, you said it well. I would think that move would definitely pin deaf against deaf, big time. That is the last thing we need.
Paotie said,
December 16, 2007 at 10:49 pm
John ..
DeafRead hasn’t picked up my last two articles, so I’m already assuming they’ve banned me. Looks like you might’ve gotten your way.
*shrugs*
Paotie
Curious Eyes said,
December 16, 2007 at 10:49 pm
so, tell us, John, who is this one person? just wondering.
Annoymous said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:01 pm
All you said was very well. John, you have to be cautious of what you say to parents. Most of us ignore your advise on what our children should raise. They are in our blood. The children who are born are who we expect to receive the best education not Deafhood’s sake. America gives us a freedom what we want for our children not under Deaf activists’ wish.
Dianrez said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:08 pm
It’s a free thinking environment that we want where all D/deaf people can throw in their heartfelt ideas and opinions and receive feedback.
The ones who don’t share sincere dialogue but are in it only to create trouble, or to upset people, are soon found out and ignored.
Nothing like the glare of public opinion to keep bloggers honest.
brenster said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:13 pm
Deaf Pundit-
I’m not all for censorship. It is OK to agree to disagree.
I find it interesting that Deaf people who promote positive thinking and raise the level of discourse are constantly attacked with misleading generalizations and assumptions. They are told that it is fine, because it’s Freedom of Speech, but when Deaf people responded, they are accused for attacking, etc etc. What about their Freedom of Speech? What a paradox.
While it is OK to disagree, it is not OK to make up information about them. For example, Deaf culture is all about exclusion, refusing to welcome oral deaf people who want to learn ASL, etc etc. Granted, some people do that, yes, but that does not mean ALL DEAF PEOPLE do that. It bothers me when some people attempt to paint wrong picture about the meaning of Deaf culture, Deafhood, etc etc.
How does that ‘bashing’ help, as you said, “raise our level of discourse”?
I do understand from your perspective. It’s just it’s hard to win with people who are pessimistic and attack people, language and culture based on illogical arguments. I did try to make some dialogues with them, but all reached at dead ends which turned out to be really pointless in the first place. OK, we will just move forward and look forward – then they accuse us for excluding. Can’t really win anything with them!
John F. Egbert said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:14 pm
#5
Parents need the education, I agree that they have the right to pick what they want for their deaf child.
But, here is the problem, AGBell/AVT gets their foot in the door before the parents are able to learn other options.j
This is something that we are working on and hope to educate the parents equally and the parents decide.
No way we will force or brainwash the parents like AGBell/AVT are so good at now.
John
A Deaf Pundit said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:18 pm
What does that have to do with censoring blogs on DeafRead, John?
Paotie and McConnell don’t discuss AG Bell. Granted, they’re audistic and have some asinine ideas, but I think we should leave it up there for the public to scrutinize, and we can learn how people like them think, so we can address that problem.
Censorship is NOT the answer. Period.
John F. Egbert said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:34 pm
So you brought up the name Paotie and McConnell, and you seem have a problem with them and their style of writing which is not constructive dialogue too…?
I haven’t name anyone.
If the readers want to discuss this, then let the majority decide who, if they have the complaint which they are plenty.
IamMine said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:34 pm
I have to agree with Deaf Pundit, John.
Censorship is not the answer.
You can simply ignore if you cannot agree with a person’s view, such as Paotie or McConnell.
No one is twisting your arm to read their blogs.
A Deaf Pundit said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:38 pm
Right… How about you answer my questions, John? Seems that you’re avoiding answering them, because you know you can’t.
And yes, I don’t like Paotie and McConnell. But do I want their blogs off DeafRead? No, I don’t.
A Deaf Pundit said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:45 pm
And by the way, Brenster, I agree. People should not make up things. That’s why the Deaf Community needs to step up to the plate and expose them, instead of trying to censor them, because when we try to censor others, it looks like we’re trying to hide something!
seekgeo said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:48 pm
I’m with DP all the way. It seems that some people fail to understand that Deafread is just a website that feeds all of our blog/vlog sites to draw viewers. It’s like a free advertisement for all of us.
So, if someone do not like certain b/vlogger then they don’t have to bother to click. I’ve been told that some of them will not bother to click mine simply because I provide captions which is perfectly fine with me.
If they can ban certain bloggers then they might as well ban me which I can live with.
-SG
John F. Egbert said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:49 pm
JJ
I agree that the deficit thinkers’ blogs will not be off DeafRead.
They will end up losing readers after learning that they rather bash and smear people than having constructive dialogue.
And yes, I may have taken chances on this but I will be healed and there will be positive feedback for everyone’s education about deficit thinking ideology.
Peace
Carl Schroeder said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:52 pm
DeafRead has banned my blog, too! Visit http://www.carl-schroeder.blogspot.com and search for “WOMAN, JEW AND DEAF ASK GOD.” I was suspended from DeafRead last year. You might like to check with Tayler to verify it.
A Deaf Pundit said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:53 pm
Oh, I know the blogs won’t be removed from DeafRead. They’ll never bow down to your demand that they be removed.
And by the way, disagreement can be very constructive. Like I said in my vlog, how can we learn from each other if we always agree with each other?
Peace to you too…
WAD said,
December 16, 2007 at 11:54 pm
Does “removing the Deficit Thinkers and ban them from DeafRead.com” agree with Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 19?
Different example, RIT’s honor code stated, “Affirm through the daily demonstration of these ideals that RIT is a university devoted to the pursuit of knowledge and a free exchange of ideas in an open and respectful climate.” Is it recommended for a person who supports censorship to apply for a job or study at colleges and universities?
anna s said,
December 17, 2007 at 12:09 am
Muchas gracias, Deaf Pundit!
The d/Deaf community is much more diverse than what some of you want to believe.
Why am I uncomfortable of allowing my Deaf son to hang out with his Deaf peers at Deaf events? Because some of them would judge my son and harming him in the long run. Why am I ok with letting him mingle with people of his own kind? It is because they do not judge.
Let DeafRead be a safe place for varied discourse. It has become a little too militant for my tastes and I have ceased from sharing Deafread’s address to parents/staff of DHH students out in the mainstream.
Paotie and McConnell are brave enough to tread the DeafRead waters. There are a LOT of deafies like them who are wading behind them. There are also a LOT of others who are somewhere in the middle like I am.
We must preserve DeafRead as a great Blog aggregator welcoming all perspectives of the d/Deaf community! Why? Let me tell you what a Deaf friend of mine said to me last night. He, a college educated Deaf man, mentioned that just 4% of deaf children succeed with CIs. I asked him where he got that number. I also asked him to define the term, success. There are quite many myths about CI, oralism, AGBell, etc circulating in the Deaf world. Granted, there are approaches I believe are not in deaf babies/children’s interest that are promoted by “the Others.”
My point here: We must fight to keep DeafRead FREE of censorship regardless of the fact thast some of the bloggers and vloggers may piss you off.
Amen!
Anna S
My boy has a CI and I am a Deaf mother of Deaf parents.
Platonic\'s Eye said,
December 17, 2007 at 12:12 am
For those who makes wrong decision about censorship it already violates First Amendment under the constitution. Deafread have no right to make that censorship without having from the lawyer first… Censorship is not welcome to this Deafread!! Deafread does not make any money from blog or vlog! Deafread has no business to tell what viewers ought to read or see or not!!!
mcconnell said,
December 17, 2007 at 12:36 am
Platonic,
DeafRead isn’t a government entity. It’s a private website or internet business, so to speak, with their own server and database. They, like all bloggers/vloggers, have the right to censor or decide which links to put up. It’s a mistake to think we have rights in other people blogs/vlogs to make whatever comments we want. The same goes for DeafRead. We don’t have a right to have our blogs linked in their DeafRead website which is a filtered feed aggregator site.
It’s privilege to have our links put up or our comments allowed to show. Not a right. And nothing to do with our right to freedom of expression. DeafRead has not violated anyone’s 1st Amendment when it comes to deciding which blog links to accept in their filtered feed aggregator site.
DP, it is interesting to see your comments about “exposing us.” Not sure what you meant by that since I’m pretty much an open book. I’ve already been “exposed” since Oct. 2004 and pretty much so during the vlog/blog conference at Gallaudet this year.
Noelle said,
December 17, 2007 at 12:39 am
I was quite shocked to read that post by John Egbert, but I had my own suspicions that something like this was coming. I’m just disgusted by what John suggested in his post. Just because I disagree with him and others about what it means to be deaf, now means that I’m a deficit thinker? Whatever happened to a diversity of opinions that John claimed to support? *snort*
Richard Roehm said,
December 17, 2007 at 12:42 am
I will not tolerate these types of “Katyusha” volleys from idiots like John Egbert. I’ll respond likewise.
A Deaf Pundit said,
December 17, 2007 at 12:46 am
Mike, while you’re right about it being a privilege for DR to publish our blogs, what John is proposing, is anathema to the First Amendment, and he’s constantly preaching the Deaf Community needs to speak out and use that right.
But he then turns around and wants to shut up people he disagrees with? He doesn’t want us to see what others are saying, because it doesn’t agree with his ideas? I already stated this in my blog.
And as for exposing you, it wasn’t about exposing YOU. I was talking about exposing the flaws in your ideas when it comes to ASL and Deaf Culture.
We’re not going to convince you that you’re wrong about some of your ideas, because you’re not the kind of person to change your mind. But we sure as hell can show the other readers the fallacies of your reasoning. I personally don’t feel up to doing it all time, because I have other things to do, but the rest of the Deaf Community can step up to the plate, instead of screaming for censorship.
mcconnell said,
December 17, 2007 at 12:56 am
Flaws and reasonings are sometimes subjective when pointing them out. Doesn’t necessarily make them true when it comes to supposed fallacies. Sometimes it is never a clear cut case and that objective reasonings are harder to come by for some people. Disagreeing with an opinion doesn’t make it into a flawed reasoning. People perceive things differently and does not necessarily make it as a false one.
Paotie said,
December 17, 2007 at 1:00 am
Gawrsh!
Well, you know, most of my articles are done in satire. Sometimes, they’re sarcastic; sometimes they’re not.
All I did was write a few things, and set off a firestorm.
I don’t call people names.
I call people’s actions names.
I poke fun of people’s behaviors.
I do not publish other people’s private information on my blog.
I don’t complain, most of all.
So, why are so many of you complaining about me?
When I first showed up as a blogger, one of the very first blogs I saw was from a certain blogger who has since been banned. The title of his blog read, “Mike McConnell is A Sick Pervert!” or something.
And last week, another blogger had another title that was very blatantly graphic and insulting towards McConnell, but nobody complained
And DeafRead allowed those to sail through.
Really, do you think DeafRead is going to do anything?
*laughs*
Paotie
DT said,
December 17, 2007 at 3:38 am
I say send Egbert a Deficit Thinker form to fill out about himself and if what he’s requesting for others, the same end will come to him, lol. If it’s Paotie he’s aiming at, as suggested by somebody, I opine that’s it’s cuz Egbert doesn’t comprehend what Paotie says, lol; but that’s beside the point. Carry on folks.
Ann_C said,
December 17, 2007 at 4:27 am
If DeafRead.com allowed only Deaf yaysayers, it’d be a dull read, ZZZzzz. The blogs are supposed to be an open forum for the exchange of many different ideas, different viewpoints, and a vast source of information.
The fact that John hasn’t named the One Not To Be Named is a classic divide-and-conquer tactic of a person who wants his yaysayers to do his work for him.
Karen Mayes said,
December 17, 2007 at 8:01 am
DP,
I am glad you brought it up. I do believe in hearing both sides… negative and positive sides of every subjects (like Taoism… negative can’t live without positive; positive can’t live without negative.)
It is disappointing to see a degree of paranoia in DeafRead, but then everyone has his/her own paranoia, brought on by his/her own fears. Which leads us to wanting to have some degree of control.
Sure, I disagree with some commenters/vloggers/bloggers. Sure I agree with others. Just like everyone else. We just have to learn to “agree to disagree”. As I have said before, also on John’s website, that there need to be respect.
Deficient/Englightened Thinkers… everyone has his/her own muses.
Okay, let’s move on then…
I am with Ann_C… we need variety in DeafRead. I enjoy Mike because he touches a wide variety of subjects, backed up with research, as well as Paotie with his quirky, sarcastic sense of humor, ABC with his funny vlogs, Ocean for her paganistic perspective, etc. We are lucky to have a wide spectrum of media in DeafRead.
Gary Brooks said,
December 17, 2007 at 10:14 am
Don’t get upset, life is short. We can work together, fix it, heal it. Maybe John makes mistake oops! forgive each other. Move on.
Happy Holidays all of you!
Gary
John Egbert said,
December 17, 2007 at 1:23 pm
Gary Brooks,
I did not make any mistake.
People need to be educated and empowered to stand up against deficit thinkers that is hurting the image of the Deaf Community.
John
A Deaf Pundit said,
December 17, 2007 at 1:27 pm
So calling for the removal of blogs from DR is empowerment and education?
Tom Willard said,
December 17, 2007 at 1:30 pm
I was also banned from DeafRead after I publicly criticized their decision-making abilities in regard to one of my posts.
What goes around comes around. Now DeafRead is planning some kind of event somewhere. I’m sure they would benefit from publicity in Deafweekly. They ain’t getting it.
Karen Mayes said,
December 17, 2007 at 2:25 pm
I shared the bit about deficient thinker with my father (he is hearing.) His dry response resds as following:
“Good Morning, Deficit Thinker. There is a universal need among humans to conceptualize life as “Us, vs. Them”. Since it is universal, I know I have been guilty of such behavior. And the best way to distinguish the good guys , “Us” from the bad guys, “Them” is to use an emotionally laden word or name. It simplifies complex issues. Name calling just feels so good, makes us feel so superior to the “Them”. Actually, deficit thinker, is one of the least offensive names I have ever seen. It is human nature to keep the rebel, the free thinker, the outsider, the nonconformist out of the “Us” group so not to contaminate the “Us” with dangerous thoughts. You see it in every walk of life. Must say I found Ella Mae Lentz’s comments clear and concise. As you said, it would be healthy for both sides to agree not to agree. I am sure the name calling helps to keep your blood pressure perking. Have fun. Love, Dad”
John F. Egbert said,
December 17, 2007 at 2:56 pm
JJ,
Censorship is not the issue anymore, it is deficit thinking.
People are being educated in the last 24 hours already on the positive side and I wished that you waited before you jumped into the conclusion that I was doing the wrong thing.
John
Name withheld upon Request said,
December 17, 2007 at 4:31 pm
Mr. Egbert:
You vaccilate more than a waffle does, you know?
You first demanded that those blogs be removed from Deafread. Now you are changing your stripes and now heartily proclaim that it is a deficit thinking issue.
I think the only thing that’s deficit here is the space between your ears.
Brian L. Mayes said,
December 18, 2007 at 9:29 pm
Sorry, I’m late, but I want to say this.
About #8… John, I will have to be honest with you and say that you would not make a good advocate for educating parents of deaf babies the option of ASL. You just have too much anger in you to be diplomatic about it. You want to know a secret? The best way to advertise is by word-of-mouth. Meaning, letting the people talk about it. Well, I think you just blew it cuz people are going to think twice in sharing information and thinking that they are “deficit thinkers”. Ummm, shots like you shot yourself in the foot.
DP, good job on this and keep at it. We like what you do in what you do. Keeping an open mind.
Later!!
Diversity in DeafRead « The Deaf Edge said,
January 20, 2008 at 2:46 pm
[...] everyone forgotten the Deficit Thinkers fiasco already? Nobody owns DeafRead. Not the CI users. Not the DeafHooders. This is a place where [...]
Deaf Bilingual Coalition: One Issue of Transparency | Paotie’s Green Couch | Crumblings of Things said,
July 13, 2008 at 2:04 pm
[...] Deaf Pundit issued a complaint to John Egbert regarding Deafhood and the DBC on December 16, 2007: ” .. but you and your friends, all proponents of Deafhood, are constantly preaching that the Deaf Community has to have open dialogue so we can grow [...]