A Moral Compass

“Conscience is a man’s compass.”~ Vincent Van Gogh

Amy Cohen-Efron’s article “Disillusionment With the Deaf Community” described her experience with cyber-bullying:

I get ostracized and harassed just because of my own opinion and my role as an Editor of DeafRead. As one of the pioneers of Deaf vlogging world, I get cyberbullied just like others. Yes, someone did call my employer about my online activities. This kind of stress caused a trip to emergency room.

Amy’s article in turn inspired Karen Mayes’ blog article “‘Different Opinions Resulting in Questionable Behaviors”. Karen wrote about her reaction to the posting of “letters to employers” on a blogsite two years ago.

I do remember four years ago, after the Deaf Bilingual Coalition’s first convention held in Milwaukee, WI, amid the disagreements and agreements, I came across one blog that stated a letter was sent to one core member’s employer and I was taken back by it… why would one go that far to contact one’s employer?

Indeed, why would a person go so far as to write a letter reporting someone’s online view/ opinion to his employer?

Is it to put that person through the emotional stress of answering his employer’s questions regarding the letter? To jeopardize a person’s job and ability to support his family?  To trash the person’s reputation in the workplace and in the deaf community?  In other words, to make that person pay for the words/ messages he put online on a private computer?

How would you feel if you were suddenly subjected to the same ordeal?

V/bloggers, commenters, and readers alike all have seen this monster rear its ugly head online. And it’s an ugly head, no matter what shape it takes on:  online personal attacks, cyber-harassment, hijacking of a thread, email threats,  organizational bullying, online outting of a v/blogger’s real name, letters written to one’s employer, frivolous lawsuits,  real-life threats/stalking, physical confrontations, ad nauseam.

Is it because of the target’s opinion/ view?  No, it’s because the attacker dropped his moral compass in the angry desire to hit back at the person he disagreed with.

It’s bad enough that there are bullies out there, committing such acts.  It’s just as bad when people turn a blind eye when they see/read such actions occurring online and in real life and do nothing to stop it. That’s called the sin of omission. Where were their consciences when they witnessed such actions?  Nowhere.

Under the comment section of Karen’s blog article, Ben Vess dropped a bombshell statement which illustrated this lack of moral compass:

After reading these comments and seeing that my name has appeared in terms of trying to refute some disputed facts between who said what.

First thing first, I do not have an opinion or statements regarding my feelings about such subject. It is too subjective for me and others to even have a productive dialogue. However, I will discuss facts.

Fact #1: Barry Sewell sought me out when he saw my blog calling Ella a coward and wanted to discuss ways to counter the opposition against “us” at the time.

Fact #2: During the whole DBC fiasco, there was DBC and then there was us.

Fact #3: Barry Sewell sent me three documents [RSD, csd, and CAD]to be signed (very explicit instructions on how this should be executed. The documents were intended to be sent to the workplaces of these three people: barb, David, and Ella. All of the documents questioned their capacity to do their jobs correctly.

Fact #4: I was the one who passed the letters on to the people being accused. Yes, me.

Fact #5: Barry sent those emails to me and I still have them. They are free to anyone who wishes to obtain a copy.

I hope having these facts come into light will clarify some of your misunderstandings about what happened with these letters and how the three accused people got them.

-Ben Vess

Ben added another comment, the last one before Karen closed the comment section:

Actually, Barry, the full truth is this: I was more than willing to sign these letters of protests, I admit that. Then i read them and realized the true intent behin them. It wasnt just about disputing their philosophy bit rather their character and decided against it and made that clear to you as well. Now, sticking only to facts..

You all of a sudden have copies of everything when you previously claimed u had no record of?

By all means Barry, go ahead and “expose” me, post the emails. I have nothing to hide.

What are YOU hiding by not doing so? C’est la question.

Ben Vess was kind enough to send me, Candy and Karen a series of email conversations that took place from July 14 to 17 in 2008 between him and Barry Sewell.  The convos occurred about two weeks after the DBC Conference in Milwaukee ended. The first series of conversations is called the “Next Step”series that took place on July 14th.

Hi Ben,

Appreciated your latest vlog.  It’s about time
somebody stood up to Ella and call her a cowards because that is what she
is.  Can’t have it both ways.. to lead a movement but hide in midst of
questions and discussions.

Regardless, I’m thinking about putting together a
group of concerned citizens and submit letters to CSD Fremont, CA Board of
Education, Rochester School for the Deaf, NY State Dept of Ed, CAD and NAD
to submit a copy of AIM meeting in which their employees and board members
participated with radical comments against CI, Oralists and how Ella
hijacked DBC and CAD to promote her financial interests in Deafhood
Foundation.

Do you know of anybody that is willing to serve as
the contact person for these letters?  We need somebody that is outside of
former DBC members.  I drafted rought drafts for everything but just need
to find a willing candidate to serve as contact person for “concerned
citizens”. My thinking is since we can’t seem to hold these
people accountable we might as well make them accountable to the State
and CAD /NAD.

This way, they will have to issue public apology or face disciplinary
actions.  Once they do that then it will break them up and destroy the
spell they are under.

Your thoughts?

Barry

———————————————————————————————————–

I appreciate your willingness to be the contact person for concerned citizens.

I think everybody knows who you and I
are and that we both support the same quest.Would be ideal if you
could find somebody that is from California for the letter to California
School for the Deaf and CAD / NAD.  And would be ideal if we
had somebody from NY for the letter to Rochester School of the
Deaf.   This way it will be seen coming from concerned
citizen from their State, which hold more weight than if it came
from you or me.

I agree with your version of what Jesus said
and has done.  People manipulate Bible into more than what it really is
just as they have done unto Paddy Ladd’s Deafhood.

Appreciate your support.

Barry

———————————————————————————————————

Aw, you will have my full support until the very end, even if i’m the
last one standing. I agree about you thinking that I am too public
for being a contact person.

I’m sure I can find someone in San Diego–they’re academics
not emotionals. I don’t believe in jesus personally but I understand the holy canon. let’s get this ball rolling!

Ben

——————————————————————————————————————————

Please also let your trusted friends know that
their name and contact information will be pasted and covered when we post the
letter on the web site. Nobody except the destinated people will know
who submitted the letter.

Thanks,

Barry

———————————————————————————————————-

Ben,

Very good.  If you can find somebody who won’t expect to be anonymous
then great.

There are three different subjects here.  Ideally, the letter to CSD
should be submitted by somebody that wears cochlear implant or belongs
to CI community because of what was said by DE.  But realistically it
could be asked by anybody that resides in Calfifornia. Ideally, the
letter to RSD (Rochester School for the Deaf) should be submitted by a
deaf person that still appreciates oralism because it will really put
Barb on the spot for what she has said and force her to come clean
with DBC and its supporters. Then any deaf person in California could submit the letter addressed to CAD and NAD to demand an investigation and perhaps even an
explanation.

Makes no difference if these individuals are deaf or hearing.  Just
make sure they understand the delicate situation.

Barry

———————————————————————————————————–

Draft letters prepared and ready to go.

[No signature] ( but this is from Barry’s email address)

The next series of convos are called the “Closure”series, which took place July 15-17, 2008.

Hello everybody. I wanted to say that we’ve
received enormous amount of response to www.DBCfacts.com from every imaginable
directions.  Most of them were very supportive and they thanked us for
disclosing the truth.  Many of them asked if it was possible for us to seek
closure and rise from the ashes.  It touched me to a level where I made the
decision to seek closure.  In short, I phased out all information to
show our love and support for deaf babies.

I shall ride into the sunset, simply because the
deaf community is not ready for my help.  I just started to vlog in
DeafVideo.tv and will continue to educate those who are listening and help them
understand things that DBC don’t want them to know.  You can see
some of my new vlogs there.  Enjoy!

I have no regrets. I met many
of wonderful people through this journey including you.  I’ve
neglected some of your personal notes and will shift my focus there now
that I’ve phased out DBCfacts.com.  The truth has been told.  What
they do with the truth is up to them.  They are responsible for their own
actions.

Hugs everybody,

Barry(DR Hocokan)

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Have you sent out these letters towards DE and Barb’s jobs? There seems
to be a commotion about this going on at Patti’s blog.

I have decided that I will refrain from blogging for a while.

-Ben

———————————————————————————————————————————

Ben,

First…  great vlog message from you
today!  It clarified things up for most people even though few are still
confused.  Got to give them many different analogy / examples in order to
reach different people with different mindsets.

The letters have not been sent out yet.  There
is one lady who is thinking about doing it.  She knows the Supt at CDR and
felt comfortable being the source of that letter to CSD.  May still need
somebody from CA for the letter to CAD and NAD.  Not sure who should
submit letter to Rochester School for the Deaf.

Have anybody in mind yet?

Probably wise for you and I to refrain from
blogging for now… and let everybody digest the truth we’ve shared…
don’t need for you or I to be out there destroying what has already been
destroyed.  We will have demonstrated ourselves as the better people
(compared to DBC Core leaders) when we know where to stop and
when.  Since I took the web site down I received so many VP calls from
strangers who realized I was not the monster they envisioned me to be.
They saw my human side and decided to call to thank us for telling the
truth.  It’s very effective when they see me in person and realize I’m not
behind this crab theory thing.  It’s for
real.

We did our part and the truth has been
told…  now they are digesting… I received many VP calls and emails from
many people I didn’t know.  They wanted to talk to me directly and they
felt better afterwards.  It’s time consuming process but it has to be
done.  Our message is getting out there and they’re working.  A guy
called me on VP a little while ago and told me about your analogy and was
impacted by it.  He understand our side now and is embarassed for his
support towards DBC. I told him not to be because we all learn and to
use it for
future references.

Keep in touch!
Barry

—————————————————————————————————————————–

Barry,

I think perhaps these letters should not be sent. I’m a bit
uncomfortable at offing someone from their job on a totally unrelated
matter (organizations and so forth). It appears the letters have
already been sent and what I’m afraid of is that they will jeopardize
our fight for transparency.

As for finding someone to send these out, I’m not sure I can really do
that. I don’t know. To be honest, I’m not sure I would appreciate
someone else doing that to me.

Have copies of these letters (that has already been sent) been given
to Barb, DE, and Ella? I think it’s fair to do so because at that
point, they are given a chance to defend themselves.

warmest,
Ben

—————————————————————————————————————————

Ben,

I totally agree.  I’ve heard about
concerns for their employment status and was a bit surprised to think
they would
lose their jobs
.  The goal is not to unemploy anybody.  The goal
is to force a public apology from those who monopolize all three entities, CAD,
DBC and Deafhood Foundation.  The goal is to expose unethical conduction
ontheir part as well as conflict of interests.

Fortunately I have not submitted any letter to
any of these agencies.  However according to several sources there were
already several other individuals who wanted to take up on this matter on their
own because evidently the CI community and Oralism advocates
are equally as outraged and concerned about it.  They are coordinating
things on their own because they wanted to CSD to clarify
their positions on the matter.  In short, I think it has taken up
on a life of its’ own, which is not surprising.

Other individuals have already planned on
taking the matter up with CAD and NAD as well.  I do not know who
these individuals are so for that reason I am not sure if I’ll ever see a
copy of these letters unless they contact me.

When I learned of this fact I mellowed out and did
not really have to do anything.  Probably best if I didn’t anyway.  I
really appreciate your suggestion.  Cooler head always prevail and I think
you and I have cooled down in the past few days.  I know I’ve cooled down
considerably after receiving so many emails and VP calls from
strangers who were
very supportive of our quest for the truth.

Regards,
Barry

[This blogger pauses] “A bit surprised to think they would lose their jobs.”  Omg.

To continue–

————————————————————————————————————————-

I think it would be much better if we got leave these documents alone.
let it sit in our mailboxes or whatnot. To be honest, I kind of get
the feeling that if they got sent out, someone is going to get
seriously burned and it won’t be them.

Maybe it’s for the best that we let the healing process start.

I believe your intentions were good, trying to get them to own up
their shit, but it seems like that they won’t. Let history judge them
for their actions today, ya know?

🙂 do stay in touch,

Ben

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Hey Ben,

Hey friend,

I learned something last night
from my VP conversation with a genius. I learned that we are not a deaf
community. We are an ASL community.

The term ‘deaf’ is a medical term.
One does not form a community based on a medical term. One forms a community
based on language therefore the name of our community is ASL community. The
term, deaf is what divides us. The term ASL is what unites us.

Now, guess
who is part of ASL community? Anybody that signs ASL! It involves interpreters,
hearing people, oralists, CI, and the deaf, as long as they sign ASL.

Why and how did we start off calling our community the “deaf community”?
It started at the DEAF SCHOOL! We labeled ourselves as deaf community, failing
to realize that we were in fact an ASL community.

Based on these facts, bilingualism is a
‘transition’, meaning we make a transition to English language to communicate
via literacy to communicate outside of our ASL community.  Based on this
approach there is no reason for our division that we are witnessing today.
Do you concur?

Barry

————————————————————————————————————————–

DeafJeff of the The Terlinguan blog made a post called “Here is to Questionable Behavior” shortly after Karen’s post.  Ben Vess commented after Candy had said that she had no part of the letter-writing campaign:

Der Sankt said…

Ah, Candy is right to stay out of this.

There are far too many people involved, to be frank. I do not feel that Barry Sewell should be severely punished more than others. I went to several people for advice on how to handle this and all but one told me NOT to pass the letters to Barb, DE, and Ella. They should be held responsible too.

Then there are those who actually sent the letters.

Barry may have been wrong in drafting them. I was wrong in agreeing to signing them before I realized the seriousness of it. It is even more wrong to have sent them after knowing that even having the letters in itself was wrong.

It is true that Candy, AnnC, Paotie, and few others did not know about any of this until I came out in Karen’s blog. It is really best to not drag them in this mess because they know just as much as most readers here.

I take full responsibility for my part in this.

I think it would be fair if you guys also seek out those who knew and turned a blind eye to it for the last two years. They are just as guilty for not having done anything to stop it. Also, those who actually took the time to send the letters out. For they are the ones who crossed a line that should never be crossed.

I just hope everyone can take responsibility for their actions and inaction and make it all possible for us to move on and form a stronger community.

-Ben

I was just as stunned as Karen, Candy and some others were upon reading Ben’s revelation earlier in Karen’s blog.  I certainly had no part in this letter-writing scheme. Remember that in my blog article regarding Barb DiGi’s mooning joke directed at Barry, I’d questioned her joke as reflecting badly on her and her leadership role, when ppl were discussing writing letters to her employer about her online activity.  I said that I didn’t condone that kind of action against her.

“I don’t condone the actions of people who “report” online behavior to another’s place of employment or to the school where a person works or studies, unless the behavior is truly criminal. In BarbDiGi’s case, the mooning clip is questionable behavior for a teacher who is usually expected to set an example for children, but it is not a criminal action. What I am referring to in my blog is about the example of leadership that Barb DiGi presents to the deaf community.”

I hate to think what would have happened had Ben’s conscience not kicked in when it did.

Barry (aka the holism) wrote several comments (these are excerpts) under Karen’s blog:

I remember being accused of contacting Barbara Digi and David Eberwein’s employers, which never happened. I waited patiently until a shred of evidence showed up about a year and half later. Barbara Digi and David Eberwein were able to secure copies of the letters and showed them to Ella. Ella acknowledged this in one of her video commment and stated that she personally saw copies of the letters and acknowledged that they did not contain my signature. Needless to say that I kept her video comment into my hard drive for future reference.

The boiling question is why did Ella, Barbara Digi, David Eberwein and many of their supporters allow the accusation against me to fly around for a long time knowing that the letters were not from me. I’ve yet to see the letters myself and am still waiting.

I was going to vlog about it and post the video of Ella’s statement regarding the letter but I could not because I was warned of repeating copyright infringements via youtube.com and DeafVideo.tv. Copying what people said and pasting them on my vlogs was not permissible. They’re using it as an excuse to shut me up however it does not stop me from distributing copies via emails to private individuals who really wanted to know the ultimate truth on these letters. I’d be glad to send you a copy as well.

And shortly after, added this one:

One more thing Karen… in that video comment Ella did not say I was innocent. She only said that she saw the letters and they did not contain my signatures and went on to say that I was too clever.

I privately emailed Barry and asked if he’d send me a copy of Ella’s vlog, which he willingly provided.  It’s a seesmic video which cannot be published online.  I viewed the vlog and can confirm that Ella did indeed say that she saw the letters and that they did not contain Barry’s signatures.   She did not say he was innocent.

Another of Barry’s comments, this time addressed to Barb DiGi:

I never denied the fact that such draft letters reached my desk from different people who were outraged by the nature of discussion that took place inside of an AOL chatroom when we were having our weekly DBC meetings. They came to my desk because pretty much everybody at DeafRead.com and DeafVideo knew that I was on a crusade against Deaf Bilingual Coalition. I produced over 21 vlogs on DBC during that period and that in itself generated different ideas coming from different people who felt disgusted with what DBC was doing. It does not mean I agreed with everything that these disgusted people might have said or done. I don’t control them and their thoughts. The idea of writing a letter to your boss was not mine. It did not originate with me. And again because people saw me as the leading crusade figure against DBC they blanketed me with different ideas on how they thought we should approach the matters. Indications and draft of letters reached my desk because of a simple fact. They saw me as the crusader against DBC.

Because I received copies and decided not to carry them out does not make me an accomplice. In fact I told people that I would not get involved. Give credit where it is due. I declined and wiped my hands clean off this saga.

And you? You had your hands on the actual letter(s) as soon as it arrived. I still do not have any clues on how many letters were sent or who sent them. You saw the signature(s) and you knew they did not contain my signature. And yet you sat back and watched the entire sage whereas I was being accused by every directions for a long period of time and yet did absolutely nothing to restore the truth.

We’ve all seen examples of a selective blind eye. This is what I mean by a sin of omission.

An excerpt from Barb’s reply to Barry:

Ok Barry, speaking of ethics, I am a bit confused because posting the letter which was addressed to my employment in your very own dbcfacts blog wasn’t exactly ethical either. Nevertheless, I reckon that you removed it knowing it was not in your best judgment so it was much appreciated that you took the step to correct it.

An excerpt from the holism’s reply to Barb:

Barb, you’re saying that I posted the letter on dbcfacts.com? Not so. What I posted was a copy of the AOL meeting showing who said what regarding rejected Cochlear Implant volunteers and strangling them. No “letter to the employer” was ever posted in that web site. This is the first time I’ve heard this. I still have the web site in my hard drive and just went over it and do not see any “letter to the employer” posted there.

Where is that “letter to the employer” post on dbcfacts.com?  Karen saw it, in fact that was the basis of her blog.  That was the “commotion in patti’s blog” (now defunct) that Ben Vess was referring to. Sauniere saw it also.  Here is an archived page of dbcfacts.com after the post was wiped. A good number of ppl saw that posting, even though it was wiped shortly after it was posted.

Barry, if you didn’t post those “letters to the employers” on dbcfacts.com and that post ain’t on your 2TB hard drive, then who did?  I refer you, Barry, to a bolded part, “…when we post the letter on the web site” in one of your “Next Step” messages to Ben (see above).  Somebody tampered with or spoofed the blogsite? Or is it selective amnesia?

An excerpt from Barry’s response to Barb:

Barb,

I’d like to see the document and compare them with my records. From the look of it I think it’s been fabricated. I won’t know until I’ve seen the copy. Ridor once suggested that somebody fabricate stuff on this issue. I have that information some where in the file but never saw anything that’s fabricated yet. Still waiting for somebody to email me a copy. And again I’ve already stated in this thread that these information did not originate with me. Already explained that information were coming from different sources. And I stand by these words. I’m protecting the names of these individuals just like you’re protecting your the people that signed the letters therefore it’s possible that I might have taken over as the “sender” in order to protect certain people but I know I did not originate them.

Ah, fabrications.  Such things take on a life of their own, especially in the hands of one who is well known to attack others online.

An excerpt of Barb’s response to dianrez’ question about what would be achieved by exposing the signers:

To respond to Dianrez, several letters were sent out to my workplace three years ago some with signatures and some without. Of course, it was not taken seriously and no action was taken. I happen to know one of the signers but I am not the kind of person who will disclose the name here.

In a recent email reply to me from Barb:

In fact, I never saw the letter myself directly from my employment but from a person (who has a connection to inside information) who mentioned that several was received with no signatures and one from Pennsylvania that this person couldn’t recall whom. It was last summer that I got to find out (from someone else) who sent the letter but again it was hearsay. I am waiting for Ben to reveal who since he was the witness who knew that sent the letters.

Interesting, so Barb never really saw the letter(s) or signature(s), but confirms that her employer did indeed receive the letter(s).  She was only told from someone with inside information (at her workplace? my guess) about who sent the letter.  Hearsay, oh, well.

Hearsay.  Lotsa “he said, she said” here.

In 2007, a member of the Deaf Bilingual Coalition launched a witch hunt campaign to drive a popular blogger out of DR.  The blogger was called all kinds of names, psychopath, deficit thinker, you-name-it.  The harassment reached its peak when same DBC member tried to expose the blogger’s real name, wrote a letter to the university where the blogger was a doctorate student, and falsely accused him of being a martial arts fighter.  A good number of people turned a selective blind eye and just watched gleefully as the sparks flew, saying nothing about the DBC member’s online witch hunt behavior.  This did happen indeed.  Many moral compasses dropped there.

When California’s AB2072 issue arose online recently, Candy was outted in her very own blog, her real name exposed by none other than a leader of the Oppose AB2072 coalition.  Her online right to keep her real name private was violated. That exposure led to Ridor vlogging  about Candy’s occupation and who her employer was.  Candy’s employer received several email letters/vlogs  regarding her private online views that had nothing to do with her job from Ricky Taylor, Carl Schroeder, Michelle Aguilar, Kathryn Kerr, and Nikki (?).  This did happen indeed.  Some more moral compasses dropped.  And people are still turning a selective blind eye.

Sin of omission, the overlooking of an attacker’s overreaching behavior simply because the target holds an online view different from yours?   You leave the door wide open for the same attacker(s) to do their dirty work over and over, to other people.

And who knows? They may come for you next.

Advertisements

144 Responses to “A Moral Compass”

  1. handeyes Says:

    Heye Ann_C

    not sure if this is the thread you were referring to:
    http://handeyes.wordpress.com/2008/07/14/im-outta-here-adios-and-be-well/

    i had to move overall the old People of the Eye entries due to my boycott of DR as it was listing and distributing attack b/vlogs

    so the site is not defunct – just relocated.

    If u scroll down in the comments u will see folks references the attack letters being up at DBCfacts and that by the afternoon they had been pulled.

    if u click the next blog entry after that one in People… called “Boo – wishfull thinking” u will see other games that were played that day (the 6 way aim chat going up and then being pulled so it would get listed on DR and then being reinserted after it was listed)

    then the next entry at People … is “SK SK – People of the Eye Stops Keying”

    I left DR because there was no way i could stop the attacks and i could not ethically turn a blinds eye

    Just as we note attacks at Amy, Barb, DE, Ella, and Candy via their workplace and affiliations – we also have to note the unjust attacks at DBC and CAD via Barry’s circulating an email of falsehoods to get “concerned citizens” to send to the CA Dept of Justice saying that the CAD bylaws were profiling and had removed the word hard of hearing from their bylaws when in fact it appears 11 times.

    Where were all those non-blind eyes to do a shout out against this attack?

    Where were all those non-sinning by omission folks to do shout-outs when Barry proclaimed he had listed AFA, CAD, and Deafhood Foundations as U.S. Extremist groups in a wikipedia page

    Where were all those righteous folks when DR/DVTV carried a Barry vlog and a blog entry attacking two Deaf mothers and their Deaf daughters?

    I know where alot of good folks were on that because they wrote letters to DR/DVTV’s sponsor Purple Communication doing major shout outs against cyberbulling, harassment and defamation.

    2 were sent by Deaf agencies serving Deaf victims of abuse. NOTE: Tayler in a couple of blog entries where he attacks me with falsehoods and namecalling (again, where were u all?) stated that one agency withdrew their letter. This is false and lie – the executive director assured me that she said no such thing and stands by her agency’s letter and had simply said if DR/DVTV removes the listing of those attack v/blogs then her agency will write them a letter of thanks.

    As would I

    As would I

    I have been thinking long and hard about this issue and i have come to the conclusion:
    1. to have a conscience one must often be conscious and it seems to me many folks r sleeping or simply believe what they read and don’t check facts
    2. some folks were born or raised with their moral compasses pointing south
    3. we r always gonna have some nutters out there
    4. none of us should be a conduit (nor an enabler by default) of harassment, bullying, defamation

    As you noted:
    First they came for….
    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392

    thank you for examining this topic

    Peace

    Patti

  2. the one and only ridor Says:

    Of course, up next is … you & White Ghost. It is only but a matter of time before we know the identity.

    C’est la vie!

    R-

  3. ireflections09 Says:

    Patti,

    Thanks for informing me that you had moved some of your old “People of the Eye” posts to your “Handeyes” blog, after leaving DR. I’d remembered the name of your old blog and went looking for the article, then wondered why I couldn’t find the article. I drew some page saying “The file you’re looking for is no longer here” or something like that.

    So, readers, the “commotion in patti’s blog” still exists, just click on Patti’s link above in her post.

    It is one thing to disagree with an organization’s actions and have a different view, but another when the disagreement is carried to the extreme of PERSONALLY attacking others and writing letters to their employers, when they’ve done nothing criminal.

    Anyone can write letters to federal or state departments about what they see as unfair or illegal practices in an organization. Non-profits are under greater scrutiny because they do have to be transparent in their dealings with the public.

    As for Barry attacking two Deaf mothers and their Deaf daughters in a vlog, I don’t know what you’re talking about here. You’ll have to refer me to that, I may not have even been aware of it.

    As for your ongoing boycott of DR and your feud with Tayler, I’m staying out of that ‘un. Tayler is the owner of DR and I believe he has tried to be fair to all d/Deaf readers and v/bloggers. One has to remember that Tayler owns DR, not the deaf community. Tayler said in one of his blogs that you have harassed him for a long time. Both of ya need to move on.

    Your conclusion of four points are duly noted, redhead. 🙂

  4. handeyes Says:

    heye Ann_C (aka Greystrokes):.

    Re: DR/DVTV – i dont know how we can discuss the b/vlogsphere without examining how all those various attacks reached our eyeballs by getting listed at DR/DVTV but i fully understand ur desire for us to move on.

    Re: harassing
    – u might want to check out:
    http://handeyes.wordpress.com/2010/09/25/to-tayler-and-our-deaf-community/

    it will give u my perspective and illuminate the fact that sending less than 10 emails over the course of 300 days can not constitute harassing nor merit the false label of harasser.

    Apparently he has also been quick to accuse others of cyberbullying if they send him an email or two on the subject also. I have never called him anything – including an audist. Can you please tell me where you got that piece of information from?

    I was not aware of the attacks on Paotie via his university and im very sorry that those happened. That was not right or just or good.

    Did you know about Native Warrior getting phone calls at his work place accusing him of things he hadn’t done and his boss taking the call so seriously as harassment that it was tracked to a phone booth in Arizona?

    There are more i have seen and it seems it is happening on both sides of the spectrum. I do not not not approve of folks attacking folks PERIOD

    challenge with peace and love and TRUTHS not falsehoods – sure

    re: anyone can write letters… sure they can but we r at the moral compass thingy are we not.

    we r talking about a cumulative pattern here and how deception, plotting, spinning, attacking, etc take place and are not to be condoned or disseminated.

    Also the govt frowns upon folks using electronic means to cross state lines to false accuse innocent organizations and individuals – just an FYI.

    I am willing to accept that folks have different LINES of what they find objectionable and what they find ok

    I am willing to accept that my standards may be pretty dang high

    i am willing to concede that the world wide web is very tangled

    i do thank u for duly noting the 4 points

    again i do thank u for this blog entry and the dialogue

    Much peace

    Patti

  5. Karen Mayes Says:

    R-

    What you did is NOT acceptable. Threat? That’s harassment. It’s an act of a bully.

    Karen Mayes

  6. handeyes Says:

    Heye Ridor –

    ur comment must have come in while i was typing my 2nd one or got approved after mine got up?

    i just wanna do a public shout out cuz im on my bloody lonely truth campaign – not cool

    not cool ur little “you’re next and ur little dog too”

    i dont care what Ann_C or White ghosts names are

    i do not care where they work

    i do not care who they live with

    i care that we put truths and facts on the table re: what they are saying and doing

    i care that we appeal to the better angels of our nature

    i care that we stand strong and firm with truth and love

    ill-will begets more ill-will – not karma just crap

    i once made a vlog apologizing to u for not having believed what u had said re: email communications and accusations from Tayler. I got alot of sh#t for that vlog but i stand by it because it was TRUE – i did not believe u until it happened to me. I got sh#t cuz folks thought it meant i approved of everything u say and do

    I do not – maybe the first comment i ever saw from u in the blogsphere was one in which u were really vicious to a Hearing mom who had a child with a CI – it might have been the target store one – i cant remember but i was like – wow this is a RUDE sob. and i didnt know ya

    now ridor i do love ya. i love lots of folks

    i do not support ur calling folks RETARDS – its wrong. i do not support u hunting down info on folks to out them.

    Challenge them – sure. Question them – sure. but Attack them by revealing private information – nope. Not cool

    Play fair – confront them with truths about what they are saying not about what their names are.

    I know plenty of folks who prefer to go by pseudo names. i understand it – id rather they stand tall and firm and dont give into fear and use their true names cuz it does go a measure forward for trust BUT i respect when folks prefer not to.

    Ridor, U have intellect. U have passion.

    u lack compassion at times. u r better than this bud. much much better

    principles over personalities

    Peace
    patti

  7. Candy Says:

    I want to echo what Deaf Pundit said on my blog:

    “People need to start filing reports with the police for harassment about these trying to get them fired for no good reason. ”

    You can read the rest of her comment over at my blog: A bully respond to anti-bullying effort.

    What Ridor did was not acceptable and if people turn a blind eye to that, then how can they expect bullying to stop if we don’t speak out on it?

    Ridor, it’s not cool what you’re doing. Just stop it.

  8. Tousi43 Says:

    Yeah, that ain’t cool, Ridor.

    Ok, let’s see P. Durr resound the same below me…..what are the odds? Lol….

  9. mcconnell Says:

    I agree. Not cool. A very stupid thing to say.

  10. White Ghost Says:

    A Big Thank You!

    It’s not cool.

  11. finlake Says:

    Hi there, Ann_C. I just wanted to tell you that I actually thanked my 101 years old grandmother last night (when I was visiting her for her 101th birthday on recent Saturday) that I’m grateful for my grandmother’s guiding me with the moral compass. And I actually borrowed “moral compass” from you.

    Just a small side notes to say thanks for the “inspiration” of the word — moral compass. Also, I wanted to thank Candy for her “heads-up” for me to this blog. I dig this blog. ^_^

  12. ireflections09 Says:

    finlake,

    Our elders have lot to offer the younger generations, for sure. I remember my dad used to say the same thing too, ‘If you can’t say anything good about a person, then don’t say anything.” I asked him where he got that saying and he said, “My mother taught me that one.”

    The old saying hit home when I learned of a story about my dad when he was referred by an ex-employee who’d embezzled his business to another businessman who was considering hiring the guy. When the fella called my dad to ask about this con-man, my dad couldn’t say anything about the charges he had to bring against this person (libel suits, ya see), but when the gentleman on the other end of the line asked if my dad had anything GOOD to say about this prospect’s work record, his silence on the phone spoke volumes.

    Needless to say, the gentleman never hired that guy.

    My father was a person who practiced what he preached. As your 101 year old grandmother has, otherwise you would not have credited her for your moral compass pointing true north. If I have in some way inspired you to thank this fine dame’s role in your upbringing, then you’re welcome. 😉

  13. White Ghost Says:

    finlake,

    You are fortunate to have the special quality of time to be with your Grandma! I’m sure that you have earned the treasure history from the World War I to the 21st century from her. The treasure history is such precious you know that! Obviously, your Grandma is your number one fan, especially, the role model. No question about that!

    I’ll have to kick your butt so you’ll have to see your Grandma as much as you can! 😉

  14. ireflections09 Says:

    hey tousi,

    Patti beat you to it, lol.

    Actually Patti and I are on speaking terms…somewhat. I have respect for her views as she does mine, and both of us are have similar backgrounds yet have different viewpoints.

    Thank you for speaking up.

  15. ireflections09 Says:

    Sweet Red River,

    Ya keep on manglin’ that Greystreak, Greystrokes, etc. Ya gonna do that to your dyin’ day, I reckon.

    Thank you for your shout-out.

    I know we’re gonna hold each other to what we done declared.

    Truce.

  16. ireflections09 Says:

    Karen,

    Thank you. Your blog started it all.

    I know that you want to keep your life tranquil, I respect why you closed comments under your blog that day. But you asked that question, a question of ethical proportions, and I paid it forward in my blog.

    Thank you for starting a path to the truth.

    Thank you for speaking up against cyber bullies.

  17. ireflections09 Says:

    Mike,

    You’re a man of succinct words. Short n’ sweet. But powerful.

    Thank you for speaking out.

  18. Tousi Says:

    Ireflections, yeah, I just saw it, thanks.

    Thank you, P. Durr…..

  19. ireflections09 Says:

    WG,

    You’re welcome. And thanks for your support.

    Hey, >bison snort< what's Texas Longhorns up to?

    A~

  20. handeyes Says:

    thanks Ann_C

    but if it helps tousi – i’ll say it again – NOT COOL Ricky aka Ridor

    empty threats – not cool

    true threats – not cool

    oh and maybe we should return to the main point of the blog – u know all the emails by Barry

    NOT COOL Barry – drafting those letters to target DE Ella and Barb via their workplace and affiliations and liscensing boards and not cool conspiring to get other folks to do the dirty deed so it looks more credible and harder to track back to the source (wow talk about premeditation and manipulation)

    tousi what are the odds u will resound the same below me

    mlk said “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”

    Peace

    patti

  21. Brian L. Mayes Says:

    Ann_C – awesome and deep blog. I have to admit that I have been blessed with a Moral Compass by the likes of you people. It used to be that I would just say whatever came to mind. Now, it is more like think about it, sleep on it and re-read something before saying something. I can be a mean and vicious person if I wanted to be, but it does more harm than good. This may sound off base, but I think that if people would just think about what they are saying or doing things would be a lot better.

    Things need to come out in the open and obviously the time is ripe for it. It takes a lot of guts to tell the truth and to show the truth.

    Now, Ridor, knock it off! It is not COOL what you are doing. You think it is cool to be a bully? You ever hear the expression, what goes around, comes around? It always comes out to be true.

    Everyone else – *high five* All your comments and insights are great and inspiring. I just love to see the good in people!

    Brian L. Mayes

  22. White Ghost Says:

    *Buffalo snorts*

    Hey! I had to avoid this but I had no choice. I knew you would throned on me!

    But you did thron on me!

    Well, I am sure there’s the good, the bad and the ugly that have been met. As long as Texas beat Ohio State at Feista Bowl, lucky us. 😉

    Nebraska vs. Okla…..better be confused with all the reds!

    You red sooners ought to keep it up. As for the Big 12’s future, Texas, Texas A&M and Okla MUST NOT divorce! That’s what the good, the bad and the ugly are all about.

  23. ireflections09 Says:

    Candy,

    Thanks to your tireless blogging about cyber harassment in the deaf blogosphere, there will be ppl signing/ talking about this issue for a while.

    For those who turn a blind eye (sin of omission) to cyber harassment of someone you disagree with, think about this: you elevate the violence of privacy and harassment with a wink of the eye… for everyone, including yourself and your friends.

    Thank you, words cannot express enough, you know that.

  24. Barb DiGi Says:

    B/vloggers who had shared their opinions by those who found it unsuitable tend to re-frame their words into weapons that they thought they were entitled to harass them by sending letters or calling their employments need to cease. But the question is how to put this to a halt?

    There ought to be a stronger law against cyberstalking making it a more serious consequence for those who harass by contacting a workplace just because an opinion differs that is shared in the b/vlogosphere. Cyberstalkers tend to attempt to harm the reputation of those who may not represent their opinions or values. An accused employee should have the right to know who were the accusers and be offered pre-paid legal protection to file a lawsuit. If we are protected under Amendment One, why wasn’t there such a protection for people who practice freedom of speech?

    By writing letters to a b/vlogger’s employment is taking away an individual’s personal rights, freedom and safety, usually by covert or anonymous methods, and pursue and monitor the victim in such a manner as to create paranoia and fear within the victim. I struggle with that and I know I am not alone. With this type of tighter laws, I believe it will seriously cut down this kind of malice in action since right now, it is like running amok in the cyberworld that people are abusing by sending the letters thinking they can make such countless accusations without any serious consequences.

    You know, Ann, I am cool with the truth laid out in your blog and all but at least notify me that you are to paste my comments in our recent e-mail conversation as I would appreciate a bit of a courtesy.

    Candy, how interesting about Deaf Pundit’s quote. It looks like she is learning a lot in these days.

    Ridor, come on, you can do better than that. People who send letters to an employee’s workplace just because they find it tasteless in their opinions do not make it right. What happens in the b/vlogosphere stays in the b/vlogosphere unless the laws have been broken. White Ghost and Ann C have the right to remain anonymous as they haven’t broken the law or harm anyone so just leave them alone.

    We just b/vlog to share our opinions and we all have the right to feel safe. No need to cross over the line.

  25. Candy Says:

    Ann, thank you…but it wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t for many other people who participated and agreed that we needed to stop bullying. And, if it wasn’t for other bloggers and vloggers who have send out the same messages. I am actually waiting for one more vlogger whom I know that is intend on making a video to stop bullying online. Looking forward to that one. Mike McConnell should also be commended for blogging about anti-bullying too. And, there are other bloggers too, including vloggers which I have listed on my compilation of deaf/hh blogs/vlogs on bullying:

    http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/2010/10/10/compilation-of-deafhh-blogsvlogs-on-bullying/

    I expect to keep on adding more links. So, keep ’em coming!

  26. ireflections09 Says:

    Barb,

    I usually ask permission on email quotes, but I slipped up this time and had forgotten. Thanks for reminding me. I do apologize.

    Right now a number of states are in the transition of passing cyber-bullying laws for minors and cyber-harassment laws for adults. The internet has become such a phenomenon that no one had anticipated that the criminal element would creep into it eventually. The anonymity of the cyber world seems to embolden such perpetrators. It also reflects what is going on in society in general– witness the lack of respect at the Philly rally at which Pres. Obama spoke, the book-thrower (omg, Obama’s own book, maybe???) and a streaker. PPl have to start speaking against this harassment that threatens ppl’s jobs or livelihoods, their family’s privacy, and last of all, the right to freedom of speech.

    Thanks for speaking up.

    As for the truth in my blog, there are probably more questions than answers at this point in time…;)

  27. handeyes Says:

    hmmm – im a bit puzzled here.

    is this comment section a case of selective reading?

    r some of u here preaching the harms of turning a blind’s eye when u urselves are not doing the shout out of:

    “NOT COOL BARRY for drafting those letters attacking three DBC leaders via their workplace, affiliations, and liscesning board, for conspiring to find folks to send it, for ur crusade to disinform the public about certain organizations and individuals”

    NOT COOL

    Im totally puzzled that ya all can just kinda flame up BIG over the one comment by Ridor – which was NOT COOL

    but u can ignore the whole passages that were penned by Barry himself

    if u have already done this public shout out – this not turning a blinds eyes or falling on deaf ears dance – pls direct me to it.

    it does me mighty good to see our souls waking up and that hypocrisy and falsehoods do not rule the day.

    Again Ann_C thanks for forging this discourse

    Peace

    Patti

  28. handeyes Says:

    ya inspired me Ann_C
    http://handeyes.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/shout-outs-of-not-cool-re-cyber-harassment/

    peace
    patti aka raging (in a righteous way) redhead

  29. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Posting or emailing threatening messages, using this forum to try and maliciously hurt and intimidate people by name-calling, seeking to attack people by contacting their employers, threatening to cut off organizations funding, intentionally making false statements about organizations, intentionally posting or emailing or aim false statements about individuals, clearly commenting to attack a person’s name and character, all of this is cyber stalking, and repeated attempts is cyber harassment. All of the above is NOT COOL – – and any and all individuals who do even one or all of these negative actions be it online forums or blogs or vlogs, DeafRead or ASLRocks, no matter where, this form hate crime needs to STOP.

    To those of you who are victims of the above, responsible bloggers and vloggers, simply DO NOT respond, NOR allow such comments to be posted, if possible. By responding it allows the stalker, or person harassing you and or others to continue to manipulate individuals and the v/blog further. DO SAVE such emails and or threats to use as evidence. There are laws in most states where cyber stalking and harassment is a CRIME. To learn of resources available please see: http://www.haltabuse.org, “Working to Halt Online Abuse” (WHOA).

    It takes a Village – –
    Thanks.

  30. Karen Mayes Says:

    Patti… I see where you are coming from.

    Like Ann_C said, her blog raises more questions about Barry’s role. I do recall, vaguely, that he was sorry about what happened and that he was willing to wipe the slate clean, to start over, a few years ago. I am not going to look for his blogs or vlogs for evidence he said that.

    So if the emails indicated that he originated the letter campaign, then no it is not cool. I am sure he learned the lesson (or he’d not quickly step down from it, not wanting to do anything with it anymore, as he said in the comments on my blog.) But we should not make him a VILLIAN… he’s not. Yes, he made questionable judgment calls and yes, WE all have made questionable judgment calls.

    We are no better nor worse, but we have to agree to be held accountable and to hold each other accountable.

  31. Brian L. Mayes Says:

    Hiya all —

    This may be off topic or an extension of “turning a blind eye”. But this is mostly about bullying.

    Anyway, I watched a movie a few days ago called The Kite Runner. A very powerful movie! I think everyone should watch it. It is captioned. There is a lot to it, but I will try my best to give the short version.

    The story talks about 2 young Iraqi boys who are really close. One stands up for himself and the other doesn’t like to fight. Well, a group corners one boy and violently/sexually bullied the one that stands up and he friend is hiding watching the whole thing (turning a blind eye).

    There is a lot more to it as the ending part is about the young boy who turned the blind eye, now a man, goes to great lengths to ask for forgiveness. At least that is the way I see it. It is a warm, heart-touching movie with a happy ending. So, please watch it.

    Full details can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kite_Runner

    My point is that, yea, we made horrible mistakes on both sides and it is possible to forgive.

    Brian L. Mayes

  32. handeyes Says:

    Sheri – bless ya!

    Brian – i beleive the kite runner is set in Afghanistan but regardless awesome book and film. Really truly heartbreaking in many ways

    yep – bystanders to carry guilt and obligations

    karen – thanks for ur note.

    re: “We are no better nor worse, but we have to agree to be held accountable and to hold each other accountable.”

    agreed

    re: barry not a villian. i have no desire to vilify him. im just on a truth campaign and i abhor falsehoods so when i see them i bust them. If he did less of that, he be less deserving of me attention and affection. I really do it out of love for him.
    Lies, attacks falsehoods, harassment etc etc are not cool

    so re: accountability and shout outs of not cool – my comment about the lack of anyone saying NOT COOL is most directed at Candy and Mike cuz they have been doing a very self-righteous stomp in emails and their blogging binge to say hey hey u bunch of bloody hypocrites cuz apparently they want to world to be saying NOT COOL RIDOR.

    its just a wee hypocritical me think for them to be making such a big stink about it considering that this thread makes self-evident:
    1. that BARRY self-discloses that he DID draft the attack letters
    2. that BARRY self-discloses that he WAS conspiring to round up VERY SPECFIC folks to carry out the dirty deed (to CSD a person with CI, to RSD an oral person… – hand tailoring and manipulating things) premeditation, deliberation, malicious intent

    totally NOT COOL

    now u say – u vaguely remember Barry offering an apology a few years ago – he did NOT ever apologize for drafting the letters and conspiring to get them sent out because he has NEVER ACKNOWLEDGED that he drafted these letters

    in ur very own thread he plays dumb. he says that some letters arrived at his desk from others cuz they were aware of his crusade against DBC (yes, his chosen word “crusade”)

    Ben showed up and said FACTS # 1, 2, 3,…..

    u close comments

    Jeffrey releases the smoking gun email in which Barry states to Ben that HE HAD DRAFTED THE LETTERS and is LOOKING FOR FOLKS TO SEND THEM – know anybody he asks?

    Ann_C gets more correspondence from Ben and Barry – more smoking guns
    more malicious intent, more truths made self evident that BARRY did do the things that he was claiming at ur place he HAD NOT DONE – DRAFT the letter and try to get folks to send them

    in fact over at ur place Barry was really upset and hurt that Barb and Ella and DE never came forward and said Barry was NOT behind those letters

    wow wow wow – that is some twisty sh#t there – some might say villian like

    oh and there was all that noise about the DBC attack letters were NEVER Posted up in DBC.facts blog site and thus carried by DR – but ta da ur own comments in the old People of the Eye thread indicate yes those letters did get posted by barry at the DBC facts blog and emails from ben and barry in Ann_C blog here indicated that Ben was alarmed by folks reactions to the letters

    Karen – u did a good and righteous thing way back then – doing a shout out about those DBC attack letters. it triggered Ben’s conscience

    Barry’s conscience i have no idea about because:
    1. he has NOT YET acknowledged that he did DRAFT a letter attacking DBC folks and he did conspire to get folks to send it
    in fact he claimed the opposite and says these letters just kinda APPEARED on his DESK

    odd he couldnt find his drafted letters and his emails to Ben on his mega HARDdrive – especially since he is hording tons of other non-important stuff

    (yes barry i have my reading glasses and me boots on)

    2. he said over at ur place that the DBC letters were not posted at DBC facts – he checked his mighty mega-harddrive and didnt see them there but alas we have evidence via the emails up above and the “People … ” thread that in FACT he did post them up at DBC facts and then pulled them

    3. we also have evidence from his emails up above that “things were now out of his hands” and better no tracks back to them

    so odd huh? maybe not a villian but certainly not a hero. A hero would have sent out a shout out to his peeps and said – some letters r getting spun around and we have thought it over and our Moral compass is shooting DUE NORTH and we say abort. UNCOOL to attack folks unjustly and under false pretenses via their workplace/affiliations/licensing board

    but nope nada – not a peep in that direction was heard

    just as not a peep was made by Barry duing the 6 way aim chat in which some off-color jokes were made about folks with CI etc. Barry made no objections and even at least once said something like “Good one, DE”

    there might be more but Barry only posted up a few of the pages of the 6 way aim chat and only for a few days – yep he only highlighted the stuff that he thought would hurt others and not his own complicity, neglect, and questionable conduct

    sooooooo if Barry truly wants to be accountable he would come forth and say:
    1. yep i drafted this letter that was a vicious and unjust attack on some leaders of DBc cuz i am one bitter apple

    2. yep i put up attack letters at DBCfacts blog site but then pulled them when folks were doing shout outs of NOT COOL

    3. yep i posted up the 6 way aim chat and only highlighted stuff to make others look bad and not my own s#it

    4. yep i have been on a crusade to disinform, distort, attack, harass, defame, and bully just about anything that has to do with Ella

    but i have not seen Barry say any of those things

    i have seen a few kinda wishy washy lets move on kinda vlogs from him but i have never seen him own up to what he has done which is LIED, MALIGNED, ATTACKED and HARASSED.

    there is alot more more more but just sticking to the TRUTHS and the FACTS that have been brought forth by Ben and Ann_C

    i truly do not want to vilify Barry but we cant really absolve him of his transgressions if he is constantly spinning, deflecting, and distorting

    did u see his whole Johnny, Still hurting blog entry?

    and to be honest Barry has not been shy about his main target – even in his shark invested blog entry he managed to credit / blame / attack / defame Ella with all the evils in the Deaf community

    “Ella, in case you’re reading this. You of all people know the primary cause. Thanks to you, this part of history is written for the rest of the world to see and read about.”

    So some how im not really feeling the love, Karen. so while i dont doubt that he has said he is sorry s#it has happened – i dont really see any of his recent b/vlogging or commenting to be indicators that he is SORRY FOR HIS OWN ROLE in this stuff

    ya know – accountability and all

    lastly as Jeffrey noted – we pull forth these truths cuz barry asked for them and cuz the truth does set ya free

    its love folks – even if its a bit tough at times it is LOVE

    karen – i really do admire all u have been trying to do lately in the blogsphere – its real important

    peace much

    patti

  33. Candy Says:

    Exactly, Brian.

    It’s not about sides. Every one has been affected.

  34. ireflections09 Says:

    Righteous Redhead,

    I raised all kinds of questions in my blog in the hopes that ppl will question themselves if they had ever let their moral compasses go awry simply because another’s different view didn’t square with their own.
    Hence why ppl are personally attacking others instead of focusing on the issue or subject in a blog, or turning a blind eye on a perpetrator targeting a person whose view is different from yours.

    You will note that I asked questions of Barry. Nowhere in my blog did I accuse him of being a liar or a deceptive person.

    You cannot force a person to apologize, Patti. You can only ask questions about that person’s actions. Only that person will come to an apology of his own free will, if he feels he did something wrong. That is for Barry to decide, not you, not me, not anybody else.

    We’re all human and have made mistakes, none of us are perfect. There is a tendency to judge others based on our own values. It doesn’t occur to us that others have different values than ours.

    I just hope that ppl start to separate the person from the action or the issue. I realize that much of the internet interaction is somewhat faceless, but we are not mindless, without emotions or intellect. There is a human being behind every opinion/ view regardless of how different it is from yours– he/she is likely a hard-working person who supports a family and has trials and tribulations in life just as you do.

    Greyhound

  35. Candy Says:

    lol laughing at the redhead and greyhound handle…

    If I remembered right, Barry didn’t deny his involvement at all and realized some of the things he shouldn’t have done, thus took dbcfacts.com down among other things. Ben isn’t any better than Barry and Barry isn’t any better than Ben. I don’t condone what was done, and had I been in on it, I would have said No and I would have encouraged them not to. Since Ben is forgiven, Barry should be too.

    The only way to move on and to heal is to learn how to forgive others…we all are, after all, human. We err. We have flaws. We learn from our mistakes. I know I have in my life, we all have.

  36. handeyes Says:

    hullo greyhound

    i totally agree that u can not force a person to apologize. dont think i suggested that.

    i think i was clarifying that he has not apologized.

    definitely the choice / option is his

    re: different viewpoints and opinions – not a problem. i dont mind debating with folks – uve seen it, we’ve done it.

    what is on the table here in ur thread is Moral Compass and conscience

    right – u know how quick folks were to say uncool ridor
    how fast folks were to exercise some judgment there and put forth some common values

    again im puzzled why u all aint saying UNCOOL barry – why is ur moral judgment, outrage, uncool shoutout so muted so carefully reserved so unstated?

    its weird!

    re: calling him a liar – i did not. i just referred to what he has said here and there and how it contradicts the evidence / truths / and facts put forth.

    re: we r all human – amen. yes. we all got families and trials and tribulations

    we – ridor, barry, patti, karen, ann_c, ella, barb, DE, mike etc

    i got compassion for Barry – worry not. My hand i still out.

    Peace

    Patti

  37. ireflections09 Says:

    Righteous Redhead,

    “again im puzzled why u all aint saying UNCOOL barry – why is ur moral judgment, outrage, uncool shoutout so muted so carefully reserved so unstated?”

    My pause at “a bit surprised that people would lose their jobs” Omg reaction is pretty obvious, Patti.

    I’m giving Barry time to come forward to answer the questions I directed to him, if he chooses to. Time will tell, and the truth always has a way of surfacing sooner or later somehow.

    Note that the DBC member who launched a witch-hunt on Paotie has never apologized to him. Despite plenty of damning evidence of what he tried to pull. Paotie has moved on, but the DBC member still is stuck in blame mode. Does that tell you something?

    grizzlygrey

  38. ireflections09 Says:

    Brian,

    Thank you for mentioning this film about two boys growing up in (yes, it is Afghanistan). I’ve never seen it but now that you’ve brought it up, I will rent the movie soon. It seems like an interesting story that I’d like to watch.

    You and Karen are an interesting odd couple. 😉

  39. Sheri A. Farinha Says:

    Patti – you are a gem. I know you are striving for peace.

    Hey, I’m with Candy who said, “The only way to move on and to heal is to learn how to forgive others…we all are, after all, human. We err. We have flaws. We learn from our mistakes. I know I have in my life, we all have.” Right on girl! If ppl are sincere and have integrity, they’ll apologize to the person they stalked or bullied if it was unintentional. If not, that’s their problem. Karma will take care of them.

    I’m in agreement, time to start anew. Tomw is a new day. From this day forward we stick together against cyberstalkers, etc.

    Meanwhile, I certainly hope to see some blog and vlog about spooky ghost stories. I’m still hoping someone does one on “what color lipstick are you?” I think that’ll be fun to see what the gals and guys hafta say.

    We need fun topics for a change.

    That’s my vote. :).

  40. Tousi43 Says:

    Patti, I’m sorry if this sounds conditional but I am not a computer guy and it takes me forever to lug and chug my way around and by the time I think I have a wee head of steam, I’ve forgotten a lot of things. Much of this goes back a couple of years, maybe a bit more and at first my interest was peripheral and then I got to know Barry through his vlogs/blogs attesting to a lifestyle he leads that I envy very much. We keep in touch via the occasional e-mail as regards life on the range and all that. I like that he is of a conservative/moderate bent, is a businessman, a family man and leads the kind of life I would emulate in a heartbeat if I had the means because I come from a similar background.

    He is a man with an opinion on many things and I don’t know why he keeps coming here; I think it is because he cares for all deaf people, not just a select “type”…..I do know one thing; the day when he thinks he is done, he will be able to have the wherewithal and the means to go riding off into the sunset with a clear conscience and not look back.

    So, Patti, the best I can offer you, since you’re insisting, is agreement in spirit that some behaviors are a no-no. I will not undertake what seems like an undaunting, for this tech dummy, task to complie, sift, and flesh out all of the convoluted information for factualness to the same degree that we have for one certain vlogger/blogger. That was a slam dunk.

    Furthermore, I will try to contact Barry and ask him to shed some light on some of the specifics; to confirm/deny/add to/clarify, ad nauseaum. How does that sit with you?

  41. Brian L. Mayes Says:

    Yep, it is Afghanistan, my bad. Thanks for making the correction, Patti and Ann (or is it RedHot and Grey?)

    “You and Karen are an interesting odd couple.” Yep, we sure are! 😉 I can see her as odd, but she will see herself as not odd. She can see me as odd, but I will see myself as not odd. Now, how odd is that! Is that an odd tongue twister?

    I have a lot more to say with some of the latest comments, but I can’t say it nicely, so I’m dropping it and holding my peace. Cuz I don’t I have a place in it.

  42. handeyes Says:

    Candy – your memory serves you very wrong here. very wrong.

    go read Barry’s comments at Karen’s and his email statements in this blog entry.

    re: “Ben isn’t any better than Barry…” oh goodness girl – our compasses are set very differently. Ben aint perfect but neither is me or thee. (insert all the nice chat about “humanness and erring etc” here)

    What ben has done that is just right and good – i ll do a shout out for that:
    1. he removed his attack b/vlog against ella of his own accord
    2. his conscience was stirred when he saw the stir over at “People of the Eye” with karen and other saying ATTACKING folks unjustly via their workplace is not cool and he said to barry – this ain’t cool
    he cites concerns re: the plan backfiring
    he cites concerns re: if it was just right or good
    he cites concenrs re: their claim for a quest for TRANS PIRACY and how the conspiring to attack folks via their work and getting others to do it for them was not transparency at work
    3. barry said basically its already in motion and out of our hands
    4. ben shared the drafted attack letters by Barry with the targeted person
    5. ben came forward with the FACTS and TRUTH at karen’s when Barry was a busy spin spin spinning
    6. ben provided the proof that Barry said did not exist and demanded to be shown – ta da – ur wish granted here it be

    i do think it takes a good person to do the right thing

    and it aint easy folks but it is good and noble and right

    so nah – i dont put ben and barry on the same scale Candy – cant see how u could – even when i squint real hard i cant figure out how u come up with that conclusion except that maybe one of our compasses is a wee bit off

    re: forgiveness – r u sharing this as a way to say u have forgiven Ridor? sweet

    if it is to preach at me that i should forgive Barry. Rest assured i have. Forgiven Barry. I love you.

    Grizzlygrey aka Ann_C

    let it be duly noted to all here that Ann_C has lodged her mighty shout out of UNCOOL barry via her “Omg”

    Thank you for clarifying as it was not totally obvious to me what with all the other clutter that that was your shout out of cyber harassment (attempted, orchestrated and/or implemented) aint cool

    and again my whole – where r the shout outs aint really directed at u but when u do have comments that look like they are defending the bloke’s actions and chastising me about stuff i didnt do (make him apologize, call him a liar etc) – i get mighty confused about what is REALLY being said here

    but heye im still confused about why you said I called Tayler an audist and i said i never did and asked u to cite where and when i had said it and u never replied and then u just left it up there in comments uncorrected – no strike through or correction. Just kinda makes me wonder why u would want to state, document, disseminate a falsehood

    hmmm

    re: john and paotie – oh goodness where r ur nice quotes about human, err, forgiveness, cant force someone to apologize, its in the past etc hmmmm

    re: blame mode – john e might not be the only one stuck, eh?

    now re: BARRY and the letters – yep i do remember what this thread was about. it has only surfaced because BARRY brought it up as a big ole wound – a source of big ole hurt that DBC folks never ran to his defense to say he had NOTHING to do with any letters of attack targeting their workplace etc

    yeah he made this made-up (ie false) claim just last week – 2 years + after the event

    stuck in blame mode hmmmmm

    OMG

    i am mighty confused about our moral compasses and i dont really feel im getting any illumination here.

    i have come to see something with the last few comments – it is kinda disturbing to see but definitely illuminating. it is kinda disappointing too but definitely illuminating so i do thank u for shedding some light on the subject. i can see much clearer now.

    by the way – in case anybody is worried about my humanness, my forgivingness, my compassness and my compassion – its all good folks.

    i wouldnt go through all this grief if i didnt believe he and WE are worth it.

    now i bid ya fare well

    Peace in,

    Patti out

  43. handeyes Says:

    wow – sheri and tousi’s comments came in while i was typing my long comment

    new beginnings – im all for them

    tousi – ur a good soul. u should speak highly of ur pal.

    If barry wants to own up to what he has done – i would be honored to witness that. if it is just smoke and mirrors – count me out.

    so now i do truly bid ya all adieu – i wont be back unless some truths be stated by the main man.

    if he choose not to – no problem. we all got options and choices

    Peace much

    patti

  44. Karen Mayes Says:

    ~scoff~

    Brian is an odd ball. Well, we are at complete opposites in many ways. 🙂

    Okay, it has been a good posting. We are starting somewhere, at least… it won’t happen overnight, that I know. We all contribute to the Deaf Cyberspace even though we don’t always agree with others.

    So for now… ta da! I am off to watching CNN for the ongoing rescue of Chile’s miners. Imagine how 33 lived with each other 24/7 learning to get along with them, compromising, accepting, etc. for 2 months. It’s possible, right? 😉

  45. Karen Mayes Says:

    One more thing… I agree with Tousi. One day Barry will ride off to the sunset with a clear conscience.

  46. Candy Says:

    Well..I know eventually some of us are going to have to move on….

    And, there will be a time for it.

    When I said on my blog that there is a time for everything, I meant it.

    I’m not done….

    There are things that need to be brought up. There are things that need to be said. Call it truth seeking. I mean, I’m sure Patti will agree with me on this. It’s not a witch hunt, because when sh*t happens where what is done is done, pretty much everyone knows about it. Getting into it and letting it out in the open as Ann_C has done is a fact of life. When that is done, I will move on to fun stuffs. But, be forewarned, I was about ready to cease blogging until that CA bill showed up. Fun stuffs, I can always do in real life. It seems harder and harder to do that online these days.

    But…I’m not done.

    😉

  47. Spiritualwing64 Says:

    Wow, I had to stop by here after I read Patti’s blog.

    Ann, nice to meet you and I enjoyed to read your blog.

    One more thing is…..I have few emails from Barry which I saved in my email inbox since 2008. Right now, I feel that I should show you guys or just keep my mouth shut! LOL I have two choices and I have not decide this yet!

    Well, have a nice day! =0)

  48. Candy Says:

    Patti…

    my compass, my conscience has served me well over the years. A wrong is a wrong, period. What they both did was wrong. Who is more wrong? what difference does it make. They both agreed to back off. Ben is still not revealing all the names of people who knew about it from the start. He did share it with some of us but he ain’t revealing it in public. Neither is Barry.

    At Deaf Jeff, Ben said:

    There are far too many people involved, to be frank. I do not feel that Barry Sewell should be severely punished more than others.

    Ben is right.

    And, at Def Jeff, Ben said:

    I think it would be fair if you guys also seek out those who knew and turned a blind eye to it for the last two years. They are just as guilty for not having done anything to stop it. Also, those who actually took the time to send the letters out. For they are the ones who crossed a line that should never be crossed.

    Who knew????

    Who turned a blind eye the past two years?????

    They were the ones who crossed a line that should never be crossed. Who are “They”?????

    Ben wasn’t talking about him nor Barry.

    I rest my case.

  49. ireflections09 Says:

    “and again my whole – where r the shout outs aint really directed at u but when u do have comments that look like they are defending the bloke’s actions and chastising me about stuff i didnt do (make him apologize, call him a liar etc) – i get mighty confused about what is REALLY being said here”

    Taking chunks, if you don’t mind, Righteous Redhead.

    Not defending Barry’s actions. What I’m trying to say here is that to constantly hector Barry’s actions as uncool over and over is not going to produce any genuine, heartfelt apology. You’re the one on that crusade, not me. In addition, you claim to have forgiveness in your heart, but your anger is showing in spades, girl. It’s enuf to drive anybody away.
    Righteous anger has its place, but overdoing it can produce the opposite effect.

    “re: blame mode – john e might not be the only one stuck, eh? ”

    You’re getting it. Paotie has long forgiven the DBC member and moved on. But the DBC member has NOT apologized for his actions and continues to get angry and blame others. He’s still stuck in that rut and hasn’t moved on. It sucks a lot of what otherwise should be positive energy for the organization he’s dedicated to.

    Unfortunately he’s not the only one, there’s a pattern of that in the deaf blogosphere.

    As for my conscience, it’s still pointed true north. I never participated in this letter-writing scheme and would not have if I’d been presented with such a letter.

    How about asking the ppl who wrote letters/ sent vlogs to Candy’s employer and the organization that sponsored her conference seminar why they had to do that? Her views on AB 2072 had NOTHING TO DO WITH HER JOB OR HER SEMINAR. Candy’s employer has the evidence and Candy saw those letters herself.

  50. finlake Says:

    Sounds like we all need to go on Maury Povich show and express it all out. -cued cough-

  51. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Since this blog posted info about Barry’s wrongdoing, it is understandable why people like Patti, and others have strong feelings against his actions. I believe most of us have commented we do not accept what he has done, and nor others who have conducted similar actions of cyberstalking and harrassment. We should not be making excuses for him nor anyone who is a cyberstalker. In every situation, it is the impact on the victim that should be factored in, and supported, instead of focus on the abuser. I feel that too much attention is given to the abuser and more attention needs to be on empowering and supporting the victim to file charges. WE do not need to see the “proof”. It will be up to the police to validate whether or not such complaints will help zero in on the stalker or harrasser, not us. My point here is, if you have been harassed or stalked, threatened, etc., save such messages and posts, to file your complaint. If anyone needs assistance on how to file complaint, here is info from US Dept of Justice Website: http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/cyberstalking.htm

    Federal law provides a number of important tools that are available to combat cyberstalking. Under 18 U.S.C. 875(c), it is a federal crime, punishable by up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000, to transmit any communication in interstate or foreign commerce containing a threat to injure the person of another. Section 875(c) applies to any communication actually transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce – thus it includes threats transmitted in interstate or foreign commerce via the telephone, e-mail, beepers, or the Internet.

    Although 18 U.S.C. 875 is an important tool, it is not an all-purpose anti-cyberstalking statute. First, it applies only to communications of actual threats. Thus, it would not apply in a situation where a cyberstalker engaged in a pattern of conduct intended to harass or annoy another (absent some threat). Also, it is not clear that it would apply to situations where a person harasses or terrorizes another by posting messages on a bulletin board or in a chat room encouraging others to harass or annoy another person (as in the California case, discussed infra.).

    Certain forms of cyberstalking also may be prosecuted under 47 U.S.C. 223. One provision of this statute makes it a federal crime, punishable by up to two years in prison, to use a telephone or telecommunications device to annoy, abuse, harass, or threaten any person at the called number.(10) The statute also requires that the perpetrator not reveal his or her name. See 47 U.S.C. 223(a)(1)(C). Although this statute is broader than 18 U.S.C. 875 — in that it covers both threats and harassment — Section 223 applies only to direct communications between the perpetrator and the victim. Thus, it would not reach a cyberstalking situation where a person harasses or terrorizes another person by posting messages on a bulletin board or in a chat room encouraging others to harass or annoy another person. Moreover, Section 223 is only a misdemeanor, punishable by not more than two years in prison.

    What To Do If You Are Being Cyberstalked

    * If you are receiving unwanted contact, make clear to that person that you would like him or her not to contact you again.

    * Save all communications for evidence. Do not edit or alter them in any way. Also, keep a record of your contacts with Internet system administrators or law enforcement officials.

    * You may want to consider blocking or filtering messages from the harasser. Many e-mail programs such as Eudora and Microsoft Outlook have a filter feature, and software can be easily obtained that will automatically delete e-mails from a particular e-mail address or that contain offensive words. Chat room contact can be blocked as well. Although formats differ, a common chat room command to block someone would be to type: /ignore (without the brackets). However, in some circumstances (such as threats of violence), it may be more appropriate to save the information and contact law enforcement authorities.

    * If harassment continues after you have asked the person to stop, contact the harasser’s Internet Service Provider (ISP). Most ISP’s have clear policies prohibiting the use of their services to abuse another person. Often, an ISP can try to stop the conduct by direct contact with the stalker or by closing their account. If you receive abusive e-mails, identify the domain (after the “@” sign) and contact that ISP. Most ISP’s have an e-mail address such as abuse@(domain name) or postmaster@(domain name) that can be used for complaints. If the ISP has a website, visit it for information on how to file a complaint.

    * Contact your local police department and inform them of the situation in as much detail as possible. In appropriate cases, they may refer the matter to state or federal authorities. If you are afraid of taking action, there are resources available to help you, Contact either:
    -The National Domestice Violence Hotline, 800-799-SAFE (phone); 800-787-3224 (TDD)
    -A local women’s shelter for advice and support.

    Thanks.

  52. brenster- Says:

    a long & fascinating read, makes me wonder where did you find the time to compose all of those together in chronological order… wow! then in comment thread, i see many conflicting statements. nothing is new!

    One thing I find to be interesting is that some of you jumped in and made excuses for Barry while he sits out idly (or perhaps still watching his compass because it couldn’t stop shifting from N to S to E to N to W to S to N to E).

    Then, Ridor made one nasty comment (yes, I agree: UNCOOL), the same of you jumped up and down saying I got my compass pointed to true north and pointed at Ridor UNCOOL UNCOOL UNCOOL! There’s even a new blog post about that! Oh, FYI, some of commenters out there at that blog are now coming up with new definitions of cyberbullying, ah. What is new!

    Like Patti said, I failed to see the same people of you saying HEY BARRY, IF YOU ACTUALLY DID THAT, UNCOOL!

    Candy said in one of comments above, “Wrong is Wrong” yet I fail to see you SHOUT OUT on Russell E. UNCOOL when he outright attacked on Joey Baer in your blog. me say: NOT COOL!

    Ann_C, silence speaks volume, yes indeed (of course, I’m not referring to that con man in your dad’s story).

  53. handeyes Says:

    still waiting

    peace

    patti

  54. ireflections09 Says:

    LOL, finlake. Thanks for the humor.

  55. ireflections09 Says:

    Sheri,

    Do any of these statutes cover the harassment consisting of letters written to one’s place of employment based on a person’s online views that have nothing to do with his job?

    Thanks.

  56. ireflections09 Says:

    brenster,

    It was time-consuming, taking several of my evenings to put this article together. I’ve since had to catch up with other things in my life, a wedding anniversary to celebrate, taking out on old tub and gutting an old bathroom in my house, working on some designs, etc. My life doesn’t revolve around the computer, that’s for sure.

    I haven’t even had time to read other ppl’s blogs much, so I’m not aware of the Russell-Joey Baer thing. Have to go there and find what all that was about soon.

    Blind eye is a two-way street, brenster. Don’t see you and some othersl doing shout-out’s of UNCOOL about what some ppl did to Candy either.

    *sigh*

  57. White Ghost Says:

    Sheri,

    Don’t you read….what Ann_C wrote in the bottom of the #4 paragraph?

    In 2007, a member of the Deaf Bilingual Coalition launched a witch hunt campaign to drive a popular blogger out of DR. The blogger was called all kinds of names, psychopath, deficit thinker, you-name-it. The harassment reached its peak when same DBC member tried to expose the blogger’s real name, wrote a letter to the university where the blogger was a doctorate student, and falsely accused him of being a martial arts fighter. A good number of people turned a selective blind eye and just watched gleefully as the sparks flew, saying nothing about the DBC member’s online witch hunt behavior. This did happen indeed. Many moral compasses dropped there.

    Would you approve of this statement? They took our popular blogger’s jokes away from us! In spite of our agreements and disagreements we had, we all love our popular blogger! We cannot sit his green couch anymore!

    It could happen to any of us……I admit that I’m afraid right now…..

  58. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Ann, it all depends on the content of the letter, if threats were issued to the individual named. Best to check with the local pd’s internet crimes unit, or check your state law to see what is covered. It varies from state to state.

    Here is info from one site listed under US Dept of Justice Website, Working to Halt Online Abuse. This list below consists of current and pending cyberstalking-related United States federal and state laws, as well as those states that do not have laws yet and related laws from other countries. Currently, there are 45 cyberstalking (and related) laws on the books. There is still one state (New Jersey) with absolutely no statutes regarding these crimes. We do not include laws that only address online harassment of children or that focus on child predators; we have listed laws that protect adult cyberstalking victims (or all victims of any age).
    http://www.haltabuse.org/resources/laws/index.shtml

    Below is another page from the same site, of private investigators who have experience in this area. http://www.haltabuse.org/resources/investigators.shtml

  59. brenster- Says:

    Ann_C – I am in fully agreement about two-way street YET I have NOT seen that from the opposing party. It goes on and on in a cycle, I know. Actually, I was more than willing to hear them out, but once I saw the inconsistency, I quickly closed that door.

    Be well!

  60. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    White Ghost,
    I’m not aware of this incident you refer to, and obviously if I was aware, my first instinct would be to assist the victim of Cyberstalking, etc. Any such actions are terrible. I think there have been several incidents people have talked about on blogs or vlogs. I am trying patiently to encourage people to reach out and empower the victims of such cyberstalking and harassment to file complaints. Too much is focused on the abuser. I hope the result of all of this awareness encourages people to reach out to support the victim, save all messages (in any form) and report it. We as bystanders can say stop, not cool, and frankly, not allow them to post. The power, and rightfully so, needs to be reclaimed by the person who is experiencing such wrongful acts by a stalker, harrasser, or if you are under 18yrs old, by a bully.

  61. ireflections09 Says:

    Thanks, Sheri, for those links. Will check those out soon.

  62. ireflections09 Says:

    Sheri,

    You sat on Paotie’s Green Couch for some time. How could you NOT have been aware of what happened to Paotie?

    *scratching my head here*

  63. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Ann, not in 2007. I discovered Paotie’s blog quite by accident actually, latter part of 2008 to mid 2009? Don’t quote me on the specific timeframe. No discussions took place about his experience. His posts, when I read them, were always funny and off the point about lala land out there. Had no clue til you just shared about it. I do not always read blogs and vlogs unless someone calls my attn to a specific article or issue, then I browse.

  64. ireflections09 Says:

    Sheri,

    Ah, I see. Thanks.

  65. Candy Says:

    That is right, Brenster. No one told Ridor that it was uncool that he contacted my employer. No one told Carl that it was uncool that he contacted my employer. No one told Kathryn Kerr that it was uncool that she contacted my employer. No one told Michelle that it was uncool that she contacted my employer. No one told Nikki that it was uncool that she encouraged ppl to contact my employer. No one told Ella that it was uncool that she encouraged others to contact my employer. Ella approved of all that. She did.

    My point in explaining what I did above was, why is Ben applauded when Ben and Barry did the exact same thing? That is hypocrisy too. Ben also said, that Barry should not get most of the blame.

    What is that tell us?

    Turning a blind eye to all that.

    When I explained that part about Ben and Barry, I wasn’t making an excuse. Which part did I say is considered an excuse??? I was making comparison and pointed out that Ben even thinks that Barry should not be the only one held accountable.

    Hello???!!!

  66. Candy Says:

    *What does that tell us? typo…

  67. PopeMistress Says:

    Since you printed that Amy Cohen-Efron’s article “Disillusionment With the Deaf Community” described her experience with cyber-bullying:

    I get ostracized and harassed just because of my own opinion and my role as an Editor of DeafRead. As one of the pioneers of Deaf vlogging world, I get cyberbullied just like others. Yes, someone did call my employer about my online activities. This kind of stress caused a trip to emergency room.

    That made me wonder :
    1. Does the DeafRead provide the health care insurance benefit for Amy trip to emergency room? Hope DeafRead will emergency room in full 100% coverage!

    2. Does the DeafRead provide “stress management” workshop???

    If if if DeafRead do not provide any of those, very simple quit working as an Editor since DeafRead owner do earn lots of money from both dvtv + DeafRead! Seems not right for the owner earn $$$$ himself without paying to the Editors??? IMO

  68. PopeMistress Says:

    my typo on nbr one on the last sentences from the 3rd paragraph: Hope DeafRead will *have* emergency room in full 100% coverage! Sorry for my rushing time before I need to prepare go to work today!

  69. Karen Mayes Says:

    Yeah… I am wondering about the “blind eye”, since there are “many people” involved who are not coming out to acknowledge their part. But I am not going to dig deeper into it. #wince# we are very quick to blame Barry or Ridor, based on their reputations, which is not fair to them, rightly or wrongly.

    I only hope… hope… that we’d be able to say, okay we all did something that affected other people negatively, and be able to move on.

  70. White Ghost Says:

    Brenster,

    Candy has a valid point. No one should blame Barry eventhough he did not send DE, Ella and Barb. As for the records, their employers did NOT receive the letters, tho.

    Per Ben Vess’ statement, Barry should NOT the one who got the blame.

    So, what does it tell us? The opposition sent everybody including the both sides: love and hate, supporters and non-supporters, I mean ALL OF US the message: Avenge and Wars. So, does it work? The answer is no.

  71. brenster- Says:

    Candy, you are turning a blind eye on other people who were also victims in cyberbullying, so you are no better yourself. No need to cite examples as they are already obvious. At least, you could have been honest about who you are actually protecting with your effort to stop cyberbullying.

    Don’t you all pin around on me as I’m not the one who said I’m going to put this “Stop Cyberbullying” campaign. I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy.

    You all, take care!

  72. White Ghost Says:

    opps!

    forgot to add: “No one should blame Barry eventhough he did not send *each of the letter(s) to* DE, Ella and Barb.

  73. Linda.Slovick Says:

    Hi Ann,

    You allege:

    “In 2007, a member of the Deaf Bilingual Coalition launched a witch hunt campaign to drive a popular blogger out of DR. The blogger was called all kinds of names, psychopath, deficit thinker, you-name-it. The harassment reached its peak when same DBC member tried to expose the blogger’s real name, wrote a letter to the university where the blogger was a doctorate student, and falsely accused him of being a martial arts fighter. A good number of people turned a selective blind eye and just watched gleefully as the sparks flew, saying nothing about the DBC member’s online witch hunt behavior. This did happen indeed. Many moral compasses dropped there.”

    Your link you provided under “This did happen indeed” doesn’t go anywhere relevant. Please check this and provide the correct link so that I may discuss where you are still wrong linking the name-calling person to whoever did the subsequent university contact and conflation of Paotie with the Joshua Dawson who is a martial artist after you have had the chance to make this correction.

    Thanks!

    – Linda

  74. Linda.Slovick Says:

    Candy now claims that Ella was also involved in the incident where irsdeaf.org publicly outted Candy’s participation as a presenter in an IRS-internal conference, causing Ridor to object to the conference’s organizer:

    Candy now alleges:

    “No one told Ella that it was uncool that she encouraged others to contact my employer. Ella approved of all that. She did. ”

    I see no evidence that warrants this addition of Ella to your list. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

    Please show proof of this otherwise libelous statement, or formally retract it.

    Thank you,

    – Linda

    P.S. So far, I find no evidence that Ridor actually tried to contact Candy’s boss… Ridor just contacted the irsdeaf.org (a Deaf affiliation group) conference organizer to complain that Candy was not well qualified to present on the topic of “Empowering Yourself – Communication Skills.” That this contact caused the organizer to ask the IRS to formally step in is due to the highly-sensitive nature of the agency’s work, NOT due to Ridor’s intentionally causing her boss to be contacted.

    It seems pretty clear from the fact that Ridor didn’t understand that the conference was private, therefore couldn’t really BE publicly boycotted (we weren’t invited in the first place!)…

    Ridor explains his reasoning and the organizer’s response in: http://www.youtube.com/user/ridor9th#p/u/23/MQ1wFnlG3Fs

    So, sorry, no shout out on that, at least not at this time… Especially since it’s just plain stupid for irsdeaf.org to publish the details of an IRS-internal conference on the public internet, where any search engine will find it.

  75. ASLElla Says:

    Candy,
    I thought we re moving on. I did offer you and Mike McComnell to talk with me on VP in hopes to clarify things faster. No response. Probably it got overlooked. Then that email group stopped. 

    Then, someone notified me of the twisted information u put in the comment about contacting the conference coordinator objecting to u being the person to talk about EMPOWERING DEAF PEOPLE.  

    FYI, that was not harrassing or defamation at all. Not bullying either. And it was out of our civil duty to protect Deaf people from what we saw as dangerous audism and elitism that it appears you insist on practicing in name of freedom of speech.  Ive tried to express why I said that but if my attempts are seen as bad, harrasssing, etc and discussed in English only, it seems fruitless. 

    But I continue to hope and I ll continue to plead and insist that we look at the bigger picture of what’s happening and being said in the Auditory Complex Industry (CI corps, AVT, AGB Academy, etc). That’s where the much much bigger problem lies. And I believe it’s that concern about the bigger picture that have led whoever called the coordinator of your workshop (not your employer, eh?) to ask Deaf centered organizations or programs to wake up and stop enabling such thinking and practices. We saw how you collaborated under disguise of an anonymous name with the audist oppressors and tried to screw up the Oppose AB 2072 Coalition. We tried to discuss with u but u continued to dismiss us and imply that we were idiotic and wrong and that the Oralists were right in “adding” ASL and that audiologists are the right experts. U showed that u either are turning a huge blind eye to that much worse oppression impacting ALL of us Deaf people or intentionally support Oralism and will not fight with them to make sure ASL is honored as a Deaf-created language equal to all other languages ie English. You will not insist that ASL and Deaf people are NOT being treated equally especially in Deaf-related fields. 

    You much rather jump on the bandwagon with the OOOO (Only One Option=Oralism) possibly because they re paying unto stir up confusion and disarry in our political fight against their oppression. 

    That was what was was problematic about when we learned you were to give a workshop ironically on empowering with communication. I don’t know exactly what those who contacted that coordinator said but I trust that they were said with good intention and not out to make ur life miserable. I didn’t contact and I believe i didn’t encourage. I’m sure i did say it’s not wrong to express concerns to that person. 

    And know what? I understand that that person said it would be problematic to replace u should that happen because he would replace u with a hearing person. I thought that was shameful because 1) he evidently doesn’t have good connections with Deaf people to find another speaker. 2) what was he doing coordinating that Deaf-centered conference if he doesn’t realize he insulted Deaf people and his comment is audist. Sigh. What a screwed up system we re dealing with! 

    So back to this. I prefer to discuss this in private on VP but guess it has to come out this way. 

    And as i said, eyes on the prize which is an audism free world for our Deaf youngsters where we can deal with bullying, harrassing, defamation the healthy Deaf Way!!  

  76. Linda.Slovick Says:

    Ridor joined ASLRocks in September and that posting was done July 4th, so neither DeafRead nor ASLRocks amplified Ridor’s post by aggregation.

    Only people who seek out Ridor’s postings saw it in real time. I found it after the fact by your pointing to it.

    Food for thought when doing and asking for shout outs… Sometimes people didn’t see it in the first place, and sometimes shout outs just increase the circle of destruction.

    – Linda

  77. Linda.Slovick Says:

    PopeMistress wonders:

    “1. Does the DeafRead provide the health care insurance benefit for Amy trip to emergency room? Hope DeafRead will emergency room in full 100% coverage!”

    This looks like a valid workers compensation claim to me.

    Caution: Actually MAKING such a claim might make Tayler’s WC insurance rates go up, so you may want to consider this before actually filing.

    Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV

    – Linda

  78. ireflections09 Says:

    Linda,

    The DBC member’s AGBellinfo.com posts were removed. One is referred to “John Egbert’s Opinions” blog where a statement shows up saying “the page you’re looking is not here”, or something to that effect. That’s the DBC member’s sleight-of-hand at work this year. A good number of DR readers and v/bloggers in 2007 can attest to having seen the accusations, links, and so forth under Mr. Egbert’s various blogsites, AGBellinfo.com, Children of the Eye, Blue Eyes, Deaf Bilingual Coalition’s Blog, Mindfield, and egbertpress.

    I cite this link http://blog.deafread.com/egbertpress/2007/12/22/john-egbert-are-you-willing-to-listen-to-a-crit/. Scroll to comment #2 in which same DBC member calls Paotie a “sociopath personality”.

    The martial arts YouTube in above link referring to Paotie was the basis of the false MMA fighter accusation for an article written by same DBC member in one of his multitude of blogsites.

    Lastly, you had to have known about this witch-hunt and the MMA fighter false accusation of Paotie. I refer you to http://blog.deafread.com/egbertpress/2007/07/22/deaf-bilingual-coalition/. You are the last commenter. YOU were reading and commenting in DR in 2007.

    You are also a board member of DBC.

  79. Candy Says:

    I have the email letter that Ridor send to my employer.

    Ella said it was justified that others reported me. Her comment is similar to how Ridor explained why I should be boycotted which he removed the said video. And similar to what Nikki said in the comment section of the videos covering this topic.

    I have three letters send to my employer via email. There was a fourth one but it was not threatening per the coordinator of that workshop. Carl send his boycott video via email.

    I will address this later on, on my blog.

    Bottom line here, I blogged about AB2072 and my employer was contacted. That organization is part of my employer. I was officially on the job when I gave my presentation. I don’t get paid to present. I was on the job.

    The question is, was it appropriate for these people to do that? NO.

    It was done because I blogged about AB2072. That is harassment.

    And if this is being played out trivially, then I have no choice but to reveal the truth.

    Ella is of the opinion that the reporting was justified because she said I am the enemy of deaf people and ASL. Why? Cuz I blogged about AB2072. That’s why.

    I am not going to comment anymore until I publish my post soon, hopefully by the end of this coming weekend.

  80. Candy Says:

    Yeah, Linda knew. She played dumb and she plays games.

  81. brenster- Says:

    Candy- You didn’t only blog about AB2072, but you did blog many other things usually trashing our people, and I for one frankly am getting sick of your tactics. When I tried to question your intention with “anti-cyberbullying” mission, I see that you constantly changed the stories. Finally, it came out and it’s only one agenda – going after Ella. Oh, I get bored! Ella, for one, among many of us have much better to do!

    WG, what are you talking about??? Where did I say in above that focused on Barry? Yes, what Barry did was NOT COOL! End of story and nothing you can say that will make me think otherwise.

  82. Linda.Slovick Says:

    Candy,

    I did NOT know about the email letter Ridor sent “to your employer” until you just now mentioned it.

    No games. Haven’t been PLAYING games. Ask Patti… Truth campaign trying to follow things down into the mud to find out what’s real, because if you don’t things don’t work right.

    When I do play real games, it’s chess not poker.

    Your distrust looks to be due to you expecting from me what you so often do in the comments of blogs yourself. Take that as a “crit,” not a game, please.

    – Linda

  83. ireflections09 Says:

    brenster,

    Wait a min, have you actually read many of Candy’s posts? Because many of her posts actually do not discuss Ella. As for “trashing her people”, well, consider that you’re trashing one of your own, too.

    Sheez, ppl, PIPE DOWN. Enuf of this personal SH*T!

    I’m gonna ask all commenters who come here from now on to stick to the SUBJECT this blog. Anybody who’s got a beef with somebody else here, go take it to private email.

    Thanks.

  84. theholism Says:

    I went over to refresh my memory on what was posted on http://www.dbcfacts.com and was able to confirm this much. We at DBCfacts.com made it known to everybody that we didn’t think such letters were appropriate and that we would not have anything to do with it. The record is there and the message was crisp clear. I have absolutely no idea what happened afterwards and I still don’t. This blog does not answer the question for me.

    And lastly, what is being discussed here in this threat is not exactly relevant to what happened back then with DBCfacts.com. We had concrete evidence showing what several teachers actually said or felt about about actual oralist people and those who wore cochlear implants. Many of us were concerned for the well-being of deaf children at these schools who might have oralism background and who might be wearing cochlear implants. We meant well and wanted to ensure their protection and ask these schools to respect the children for the choices they and their parents may have made. It was NEVER our intention to cause termination of their employment. For some reason some people interpreted it differently and thought that was the very intention of these letters. Upon hearing people’s concerns for possible consequences we made the decision not to pursue this avenue.

    The ultimate point here is we’d do it all over again and send these letters out if we had a way to ensure that the possibility of terminating these people’s employment would not happen. We still believe, even unto today, that we have every rights to protect the well-beings of deaf children with oralism / cochlear implant backgrounds. It’s not the teachers’ job to infiltrate into their personal decisions. Instead, it’s their job to teach, academically and strictly that. They are entitled to their opinions, yes, but they need to keep it to themselves. They opened themselves to be scrutinized when they exposed their opinion in public.

    Enough said. I’ve moved on and would encourage everybody to move on as well.

    Candy, I feel for you. What happened to you was shameful. However it is not something I would compare with what happened with DBC.

  85. Candy Says:

    Brenster..

    you were not on that email group, so you do not know what you’re talking about. I am not trashing Ella. Truths are not trashing.

    My post are all there on my blog, show me ONE example of trashing individuals.

    I asked you to tell me what your definition of bullying is and you never responded.

    Before you say things about me, show me exactly where and when I have said it. It is all there on my blog. I have nothing to hide.

  86. finlake Says:

    Guess the Maury Povich show still got some slots to fill in.

  87. theholism Says:

    Sorry but the comment I posted above did not appear in its entirety. It only shows the half end but does not seem to show the first half. Not sure why. Will try to type it again.

    Tousi asked me to stop by and read his comment so I did. I’ve been here once before these comments were generated. Upon seeing how long this post was I simply lost interest. I meant no disrespect for the bloggers or the participants. I knew it was not going to get any where due to too much hearsays in here. I could hit my desk and pull up gigantic files on everything and verify the integrity of everything that was posted in here. That would take me many working days. So do I do it? No. Do I begin to expose everybody’s names in order to rescue myself? No. I already made this clear to everybody in other blog sites.

    The weird thing is I’m seeing all the same people in this thread who have asked me to move on. And yet they’re back in here digging the same trench all over again.

    I already felt vindicated when several eye witnesses came out and said they didn’t see my signatures any where. I wiped my hands off the letter sage as soon as Ben wiped his hands off it. If it was good enough for Ben then it’s good enough for me. I have no idea what happened afterwards and still don’t. I double checked the files http://www.dbcfacts.com and was able to confirm this much. We posted this message in public and stated that we did not think the letter thing was a good idea and that we would not have anything to do with it. What happened afterwards was beyond me.

    (the above comment belongs here)

  88. theholism Says:

    Forgot to repeat one more thing from the original comment that did not show up.

    When we decided to wipe our hands off this letter effort we have absolutely no idea what happened afterwards. And because the eye-witnesses have refused to disclose the identities of the signers we have absolutely no way of knowing if any of these letters came from DBCfacts.com or if they were produced independently by concerned citizens.

  89. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Candy,
    First, I am gonna hafta post this on Ann’s blog since you and Ella are both there, and not both of you on your blog. Yes, you were most certainly willing to move on, and I hope you continue in this direction. I do see this forgiveness in you, and I do see you have many of the same thinking about issues that many of us here in California have, so thank you for that.

    Ella can also be a forgiving person, once she understands better where you were coming from, doesn’t mean she will agree, but knowing her, she will work with you if you are willing to show this too. Perhaps end up agreeing to disagree, and as you said, it has to start somewhere. I can see that you are willing to resolve this, but I also see Ella saying the same thing. I don’t think it was clear enough on your end that you supported ASL having an equal place on par with English, written or spoken. I think this was marred by the fact you took a position to support the very people who support Oral only, and whom introduced the bill instead of us. Many of us could not understand why you were so against what we were trying to do. By the same token, I dont think we were clear enough on our position either. The good thing is that we are talking about understanding one another better. I for one, did not have the time to explain anything to you or anyone outside of CDNIA being completely tied up with many things, beyond breathing and sleeping at night, smile.

    Ella and I agree on many things, and there are some areas we do not agree on. That is okay, our friendship doesn’t dwell on the things we do not agree on because we both know there is too much to do out there, together. I do not agree with Ella that contacting your employer, nor workshop presenter is justified. I am surprised she would think this way to be honest.
    I think in ASL it can be said better. But let me say this, I saw what happened to Amy, and I saw what happened to DE and Joey, and whoever else it was where witchhunts took place to contact people’s employers. It left an ugly mark, and created further distrust, and it did NOT justify anything. IF you were physically threatening to kill or harm people, that is one thing that I would consider “justified” contacting everyone including the employer. Political issues, are just that, politics. We really did not appreciate the stance you took. The difference is, I had the oppty to talk with you bits here and there about you and I disagreeing about AB2072, and agreeing too. Ella has not had this opportunity. She has invited you to discuss this further, for the same reason, it is my belief she WANTS to work it out with you, a fellow Deaf American, to support issues that affect all Deaf babies. She is strong in her passion about raising the bar for Deaf, and taking pride in our identity as Deaf people. Sometimes her passion can scare the shit out of people who do not know her very well. I’m real strong in my passion about politics, and can scare the shit of people too for that matter, smile. We have learned from each other, and grow. Honestly, Ella has a lot of peace and loving in her, just like you. And like you, she will take up vlogging on an issue she feels strongly about. It takes time to understand one another better so I suggest that is what you both can do next, get to know one another, and who knows maybe she will come to agree that action contacting your employer was not justified.

    Turning this back to moral compass…I do hope all of the discussions help to remind us to check our moral compass, to guide us in the steps ahead.

  90. White Ghost Says:

    finlake @ 9:52 pm

    shhh! …..and Jerry Springer Show. Please call bodyguards and hire ’em!

    Your’e funny and I like you for being funny person! ha.

  91. Candy Says:

    I’m ready to head out the door for a long walk…..

    Will be back later…

    But, Sheri you have to understand that I liked the bill’s idea of making sure all the parents are aware of all the communication and language options (note the ‘s’ in options) for their child. As long as they are informed, they get to make the choices. Not us. I have no problem with ASL being on par as far as information being disseminated to parents.

    Here’s the problem: Ella’s vlog on what the newborn hearing screening reform wanted to happen. It was ASL first and other options later after child is fluent in ASL.

    That correlates with the “DNIA Statement” that was on the original opposeAB2072 site.

    I supported that bill. Ella did not. She sees that reporting to my employer was justified because of that. I say that it is wrong.

    If she is willing to agree to disagree, then she need to say it. she need to understand that I feel every organization has a right to exist and they all have a right to promote their vision/mission. No more anti-Ci messages. I don’t see anti-ASL messages as much as I see anti-CI.

    And, to be honest that eugenics claim was going way too far. The bill isn’t about turning every baby into non-deaf person. Even those that have CI are still deaf.

    I think the deaf community does not understand many things and what they don’t understand, they fear.

    When I talked to someone who was working with Mendoza, that person did not look down on the deaf community. The view was all parents need to be told of every options. This parent was not told of anything but ASL and that was wrong. This parent knows ASL, it just so happens this parent prefers CI/AVT for his/her child. It’s his/her right. We all sure can live together in harmony. Why not? Tolerance is respecting that, it is no different when we ask for tolerance in Gay community or people of color.

    The point here is we need to be respectful of all organizations that have different view even if we don’t agree with it.

    Time is wasting on promoting ASL/Bilingual when it is spend attacking the oralist organizations.

    Maybe it is time to stop all that and move on. But, once someone brings up the past, it is all going to be flooding back again. You know it.

  92. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Candy, we are sort of saying the same thing, only we are framing it the way it needs to be framed for early language acquisition. It is the deaf baby’s human right to sign language from the start, and in order for parents to know about this, is to ensure any and all information clearly helps parents make informed decisions about language acquisition of ASL and English. Access to English, may or may not be utilized by written only, or if spoken and using a medical device such as hearing aids or Cochlear Implant, fine, but to ensure parents understand fully the risks of CI in infants, not only the benefits. That is the difference and this is the stance we took. It is all in how it is stated and presented that is key. Whether or not this is what you understood or not, but our legislators sure did, and it made sense to them what we were asking.

    One of the principle supporters who is also a principal of one of the oral only schools told me she wished that instead of pursuing this legislation, that she had sought me out to work together to approach the Department of Education to ask that they improve the materials. Her eyes were opened to why we were objecting, she sees her daughter as a member of the Deaf Community, and sees us as her daughters advocates some day. Truly, we all could have worked together, had this been handled right in the first place to involve parents and deaf advocates from the ASL Community. “Nothing about us, without us”.

    I think we all should take a long walk, lord knows my body could certainly stand to lose a few thousand pounds.
    Just a few..:)

  93. Candy Says:

    Barry…

    I have issue with this part where you said:

    “The ultimate point here is we’d do it all over again and send these letters out if we had a way to ensure that the possibility of terminating these people’s employment would not happen. We still believe, even unto today, that we have every rights to protect the well-beings of deaf children with oralism / cochlear implant backgrounds.”

    I understand, you’re speaking for yourself and others – the “they’s” whom you are protecting.

    Sending letters out to INDIVIDUALS employer is wrong. And, I will explain why.

    Sending letters out in regards to making a complain about an organization, such as DBC isn’t necessarily wrong. I think that if you had done that, contacted DOJ, Dept of Ed, etc that is ok, I have no issues with that as long as the complaint isn’t frivolous.

    But, when it comes to individuals, I do have a problem with it. We are talking specifically about these “teachers” that are expressing their opinions that you/they were concerned about. Here is what you said:

    “We had concrete evidence showing what several teachers actually said or felt about about actual oralist people and those who wore cochlear implants.”

    There is no reason to report them and I will explain why.

    School districts or any program within the school system have their own guidelines that teachers have to follow. or whatever it is that it’s called, policy, philosophy etc.

    I know of many teachers for the deaf that have expressed dismay over how students are taught. Many have ideas of what should be done, what is the right way to do it but they say they cannot override it. These teachers you spoke of, might have expressed an opinion but they are very limited in what they can do. These teachers do not have the power to change how things are in the school that they teach. I don’t understand why you thought they should be reported, unless they violated some law. If these teacher did something unorthodox, and there is evidence of that, then the going ons need to be reported to the state department of education.

    The question here is, did these teacher violate any law or school rules? Did they go against what the school system frowns upon?

    Unless there is something more that you’re not sharing.

    You said:

    It’s not the teachers’ job to infiltrate into their personal decisions. Instead, it’s their job to teach, academically and strictly that. They are entitled to their opinions, yes, but they need to keep it to themselves. They opened themselves to be scrutinized when they exposed their opinion in public.

    Did you have proof that these teachers did anything more than just expressed their opinions? If so, exactly what did they do?

    Again, opinions does not mean they’re doing it. Teachers who express opinions usually have their hands tied because they can’t do anything about it except express opinions.

    I don’t have dbcfacts.com in front of me to see anything specific. I still do not think that there is any justification for anyone to contact anyone’s employment unless they broke the law.

  94. Candy Says:

    Sheri..

    “It is the deaf baby’s human right to sign language from the start, and in order for parents to know about this, is to ensure any and all information clearly helps parents make informed decisions about language acquisition of ASL and English.”

    Not everyone sees it that way, Sheri.

    Language acquisition can be achieved by listening and speaking as well.

    You might have an opinion that ASL is deaf baby’s right, but that’s your view. It does not mean that all deaf babies should be taught ASL. That is DBC’s view, teach all babies ASL from the start and that does not sit well with some parents when they find out or see other kids doing very well with CI/AV.

    Anyway, I don’t think Ann_C appreciates our discussions on this because it has nothing to do with the topic and AB2072 is DONE and over with. I’m sure you guys will do better next year. But, trust me, you won’t get anywhere if ASL is mandated for all deaf babies. Just saying that you will have to come to some kind of compromise where information must be shared with all parents on everything, decisions should end with parents. I’m sure you guys can find research that will back your claim and I do know of research that will back CI/AV claims too. You guys do have tough work cut out for you next year if a similar bill is going to be brought up again. Good Luck with that.

  95. patti Says:

    Barry – at Karen’s Questionable Behavior thread – in one of your long comments to Barb you wrote:

    “The idea of writing a letter to your boss was not mine. It did not originate with me.”

    Yet in your email to Ben (see top of this email if you cant find it on your mega harddrive):
    “I drafted rought drafts for everything but just need
    to find a willing candidate to serve as contact person for “concerned
    citizens”.

    YOUR OWN WORD BARRY – saying that YOU DRAFTED those letters. Whereas, at Karen’s you kept claiming that those letters just arrived to your desk by others and they you went on to bully the targets of your attempted attack for never defending you??? That is dysfunctional discourse at its worse me pal

    you also went on to write in ur email to Ben:

    “My thinking is since we can’t seem to hold these
    people accountable we might as well make them accountable to the State
    and CAD /NAD.”

    “they [Ella, Barb, and DE] will have to issue public apology or face disciplinary
    actions. Once they do that then it will break them up and destroy the
    spell they are under.”

    DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS – hmmmmm. for what exactly????

    The FACTS are not synching up with what you said at Karen’s or what you have said above here in comments.

    My hand is still out to u.

    Jig is up on that one, me friend.

    Quit spinning – ya just keep tripping urself up. we can not move on if you keep lying, lodging false accusations, spinning, twisting, and harassing.

    make a commitment to refrain from the above and then we can truly move.

    ———-
    Off the point but related to the whole – everybody should do shout outs when we see stuff in the blogsphere that ain’t cool – (like ann_c has done by bringing in some past events unrelated to this blog entry etc)

    Crystal, Barry’s wife, vlog dissing Lesbians – very UNCOOL

    especially coming after a rash of suicides by Gay/Lesbian/Bi/Transgender youth due to cyberbullying and being stigmatized via online / digital media.

    Peace

    Patti

  96. finlake Says:

    Sheri and Candy (and everyone else), if it makes you feel better, I’ve been pumping iron instead of taking a walk to relieve my stress from watching this forum amongst other forums. 🙂 Yes, I’m inspired to imitate The Terminator’s Spartan body for I’m the 80’s child. How ironic, isn’t it? That is if you get the subtle gist.

    With that said, I hope both parties would be able to agree on certain point(s) and propose/lobby for a better win-win bill to be pushed into the legislature body. As for me, I still adhere to my philosophy of choosing -NOT- to be affiliated with neither group though I know I will express an opinion which would likely have people clustering me into a certain camp. Yet, my opinion is mine alone, nothing more or less.

    What opinion you might ask? My opinion is the parents should be entitled to the decision they feel is best for their child, period. However, I would strongly encourage the utilization of ASL for it is almost bullet-proof case for almost, if not 100%, acquisition of learning process of being functional member of our society. C.I. or hearing aids or AVT, those aren’t on my agenda because the variables for degree of hearing loss are immense. If those auditory assistance/tutorial are needed, I strongly believe it’d be beneficial had the child be getting equal access of learning process of speech/audio -with- the assistance of ASL. Heck, I was raised that way and it paid a huge dividend for me in my later years with ASL, except it was PSE/SEE at the time. However, I cannot say it’d be the same for every child. As for mandatory usage of ASL, I would not concur to it for it makes me think of George Orwell’s 1984. Totalitarian society is something I strongly frown upon for it resembles a dictatorship society.

    Anyhow, to be frank, as of the last month or two, I’ve seen a healing process being properly healed albeit the rough going of putting the iodine on the wound which stings like … frack. Frack, you say? Ok… in other words *#@&!

    I commend all parties involved, especially Patti Durr and Karen Mayes for opening up the platform for a better closure. FFS, I hope the closure will be on good terms. Actually, it wouldn’t be those two alone if it wasn’t for others to participate in this rather heated discussion/argumentation.

    By the way, pleasure to “read-meet” you, Sheri.

    Who am I? Let’s say I’ve been observing from afar for quite some time and refused to participate at the time, until this year. Why’s that? Too much of bullying almost everywhere, and I went “Frack that.” (As in *#@& in other word in case if you’ve got short term memory.)

    Yes, I’ll call Maury Povich and notify him of our cancellation of being on his platform.

  97. ireflections09 Says:

    finlake,

    *chuckle* That cancellation has to be mutual, ya know.

  98. theholism Says:

    Hi Candy,

    Thank you for your feedback. I appreciated them. The points you made just now are valid points based on what we know today. These sound advices were not thought by anybody back then simply because we did not have the experience to know the wisdom behind what we know today.

    You see, if we knew back then what we know today I’m absolutely sure that we’d have approach the whole thing differently. Like I pointed out, the concern was to protect the child’s rights to use whatever communication options they and their parents choose to use. V/blogging was totally new to pretty much everybody and most people had absolutely no idea we’d be talking about cyberbullying issues today. If we knew what we’d be talking about today I’m absolutely sure we’d do many things differently few years ago. Touting our wisdom today for the mistakes that were made few years ago is fine but it’s senseless to try and pin somebody today for the mistakes that were made few years ago.

    I am only here to tell my side of story based on what happened few years ago. Today we know better and yes we’d still have sent out the letter. I did not say we’d send it to the employers. I’m saying we’d find a better channel to use and approach it differently. That’s based on what we know today.

    The school’s so-called philosophy and policy don’t count for much when it comes down to parental rights, choices and decision. Does it? Ultimately it’s the parents that will decide what they want for their deaf children. They will decide if the school program is suitable for their children. If the school sucks they’re not going to attract very many students and may eventually close. They have to compete for parent’s confidence and trust. The parents want to make sure that the school program contain staffs who respect all communication options. I was not referring to how the students are taught. I understand the limitations involving the teachers. That was not an issue with me.

    Any public or State funded teachers that goes out and bashes against oralism and cochlear implants in public will always generate concerns for the students of that school. I mean, who in their right mind would neglect the teacher’s hatred towards oralism and cochlear implants knowing that his or her students might have oralism / CI backgrounds? Don’t know about you but I along with many others will always stand up for the children and demand tolerance / respect from these teachers / staff or administration. A racist teacher that hates black people should be put on the radar if he or she has black students. That’s the point I was making.

    One does not always need to know what’s happening inside of a classroom to know if the teacher is a suitable teacher for specific kind of student. There are many other ways to detect a problem.

    And again, I totally agree with all of your points. That’s the wisdom we hold today. None of us had that wisdom few years ago. In essence we’re pretty much the pioneers in what we’re discussing today. Lessons learned but it does not mean we should tie our hands behind our back the next time we hear a teacher bash against oralism / CI.

  99. Candy Says:

    Barry..

    I believe the majority of teachers know better not to bash oralism/CI on the job. And if any of them did, depending on the age of the kid, I’m sure the kid will report it to their parents.

    I feel better knowing that you agree, based on what you know today, you would still have encouraged sending out letters, BUT it would not be to individual’s employer.

    That’s clear now.

  100. Candy Says:

    finlake..

    How long have you been observing, if you don’t mind sharing that with us…

    Sheri does not have to worry about me, in fact, many people in CA do not.

    I’m simply a blogger that expressed an opinion. What I say on my blog does not have adverse effect on CA legislation.

    That’s the part that befuddles me.

  101. Tousi43 Says:

    Candy….about the part that befuddles ya….wanna operate outta my house in So. Ca? LOL…..

  102. finlake Says:

    Hmm… that’s kinda hard to gauge. I reckon I was around real sporadically because I was busy skiing all the time and playing around like a class clown.

    Now that I had to think hard, it was the spring/summer of the protest at Gallaudet University with the JKF mess.

    I thought it was way worst than it was with the original DPN of 88 because I wasn’t exactly clear especially the “Not Deaf Enough” card was floating around. And the bullying back and forth after the 2nd DPN was settled down in vlogsphere got me confused as hell. So it took me a while to digest wtf was going on.

  103. Candy Says:

    patti…

    Are you going to do shout out at what Ella said?

    Just wondering.

    Cuz if you don’t, then me be doing me own shout out on me blog….

  104. ireflections09 Says:

    finlake,

    It’s okay. Lotsa ppl in the same boat as you. There are more observers than talkers in the deaf blogosphere. And some observers have quite astute conclusions– if only they’d speak up once in a while, like you do.

    Sometimes, methinks all it takes is a big kitchen and we’d all be cracking jokes and telling funny stories, ASL, fingerspelling and spoken English all, a big mix…sigh.

  105. Candy Says:

    Tousi43..

    lol

    That would drive them mad, I suppose.

  106. Karen Mayes Says:

    Glad to see that we all listened and understood each other in some ways.

    🙂 @ finlake’s injections of light humor into this posting.

    Take care.

  107. White Ghost Says:

    Ann,

    Sorry if it’s the off the point.

    Candy/Barry,

    Yes, you both are right. You guys did good in corresponding at each other in this blog about the teachers’ issues. That’s good.

    Any teachers/staff/principals who work at the “school for the Deaf” were paid by the State Government. I think when they hire for a job, they sign the commitment paper not to participate any of the disagreements within the government or anywhere else.

    Federal, State, and Local Government Employees, Staffs, Teachers and Principals are NOT supposed to participate in ANY protests.

  108. patti Says:

    candy –

    Ella above explains her OPINION – she has not falsely labeled something as a fact that is not a fact. She also states:”I didn’t contact and I believe i didn’t encourage. I’m sure i did say it’s not wrong to express concerns to that person.”

    so Candy what am i (patti) supposed to be shouting out against?

    It is sad how u dragged this in here while preaching forgiveness. Put the letters up at your place as i have asked you before so we have all the FACTS and if folks attacked u under false pretenses i will do a major shout out. If folks were just expressing their concerns based on facts – ill look at if the intent and aim or possible outcome was termination and determine if a shout out is in order but girl u have to give me the FACTS first.

    see i may be slow but im learning

    re: Barry’s drafted letters – yep back to the bloody point of this thread – they (whether they got sent or modified and sent i do not care) what they contained were FALSEHOODS with the intent to have DISCIPLINARY actions taken against folks and to destroy the DBC

    he would still do it today if it wouldnt cause them to loose their jobs – SAD SAD SAD

    but it is a TRUTH – PAH!

    thank u barry for speaking a truth for all to see.

    the letters Barry drafted against Ella, DE, and Barb contain false accusations with the intent to defame and hurt the targets and DBC (the fact that he didnt want folks to loose their jobs or positions is not any consolation for his conduct.)

    I do want to thank everyone here who put forth facts and truths.

    Peace (positive peace is not the absence of tension but rather the presence of justice as MLK explained it)
    – it is unjust what Barry has been doing and it is unjustifiable.

    his commitment to continue doing so is WRONG

    DE, Ella and Barb may have taken strong positions re: Oralism – meaning the extreme system that EXCLUDES the inclusion natural signed language in the life of Deaf children – and CI especially in conjunction with AVT (which prohibits lipreading and signing)

    They may have challenged those systems and practices but they have NEVER said a person with a CI is bad and should be unloved

    The off-color jokes that DE made in the aim chat were NOT objected to by ANYONE including BARRY himself. in fact barry is seen to make a comment of “Good One, DE” or something to that effect after one of DEs other off the cuff remarks.

    If Barb, DE and Ella EVER EVER EVER preached a gospel of hate against children with CIs and their parents or children who are oral – I would be the first person to do a shout out.

    Now they may have said some unchaste things or things I may disagree with at some points in their lives but they have NEVER made a public statement representing themselves, their schools or affiliations in a light that preach intolerance, profiling, or hate. NEVER

    my ability to disagree with what folks might say from time to time and still see their overall pattern of conduct, intention and aim – applies to meself also. I do not always agree with i have said or done and need good folks to give me a shout out and to help guide me way.

    It is not true what Barry has been saying about DE, Ella and Barb and he has laid a path of FALSEHOODS from the moment he left the DBC

    He has made it abundantly clear that he is on a vendetta to discredit and disban the DBC, AFA, Deafhood Foundation, CAD, oppose AB 2072, and Ella

    The results of all his efforts are:
    – DBC is alive and well and doing good work
    – AFA is alive and well and doing good work
    – CAD is alive and well and doing good work
    – oppose AB 2072 was alive and well and did good work – and succeed in their aim
    – Ella is alive and well and doing good work
    – I am alive and well and doing good work
    – Barb is alive and well and doing good work
    – DE is alive and well and doing good work
    – The Deafhood movement is alive and well and doing good work
    – The audism free movement is alive and well and doing good work
    – The bilingual – bicultural movement is alive and well and doing good work

    despite the relentless smear campaign, harassment, attacks, and falseHOODS

    Signing Circle never even got their by laws together and it has been discredited and banned

    deafless is dead

    false extremist group listings is booted from wikipedia

    Oral / Aural only is opposed by ICED Vancouver 2010 New Era agreement

    Deafread has become a wasteland of attack blogs, mapping 1, 2, 3 and announcements

    Oppose AB 2072 is vetoed by Governor Arnold

    MANY MANY MANY good folks have made vlogs and video comments saying how much they regret having been duped by Barry. some have even cried. This is why i do this truth campaign. I have no desire to hurt Barry. I do desire that he stop lying, harassing, defaming, attacking, and bullying. (Tar, Cheryl, Nikki, Richard, CajunPeach, ASLKimber etc etc etc have spoken their truths and many more – it is for them that i stand)

    so the fact that Barry is committed to doing the same stuff all over again – well goodness – doesnt seem like those strategies have been paying off too well but heye – far be it for me to be a critic

    it is clear that he has chosen to remain on his path of falsehoods and attacks

    it is clear that some of you have chosen to dismiss his past conduct and his present commitment to more of the same

    i will not be back here but again i am very thankful for the opportunity to see these truths and others unfold. it is important.

    I forgive, I love, and i continue to move forward in our quest for POSITIVE PEACE, JUSTICE, and EQUALITY for all

    if anybody wants me – ill just be hanging out at “People of the Eye” and Karen’s “tranquilty” i aint going to no more bad neighborhoods no more.

    focusing me time in the real world and cyber UNreality

    peace in

    Patti

  109. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Finlake, nice to meet you too, keep on pumpin’ iron and maybe Maury will have you as the star on his show 🙂

    Candy, you said, “I’m simply a blogger that expressed an opinion. What I say on my blog does not have adverse effect on CA legislation. That’s the part that befuddles me.”
    Know what befuddles me? Its one thing to state an opinion on an issue on your blog, esp when you live outside of California, not having all the answers and only relying on text of what you see to form your opinion. But to purposely seek and contact CA legislators with the intent to kill our efforts, maliciously trying to counter what we were trying to do, how is this any different than people contacting your employer? To some, this was viewed as harrassment on your part. Take a step back and see how you might feel if it was legislation you were working on, and people contacted your legislators to try and do a smear campaign on your efforts? Perception is everything, and then nothing. But deliberate actions, spoke louder than words. I think accountability goes both ways.

    See what I’m sayin’ ? (Literally, not the movie folks).

  110. finlake Says:

    Are we gonna continue to be slaves of yesterday?

  111. ireflections09 Says:

    Sheri,

    “But to purposely seek and contact CA legislators with the intent to kill our efforts, maliciously trying to counter what we were trying to do, how is this any different than people contacting your employer?”

    To clarify some things, I have verification that it was Elisa Roche who contacted Candy, not the other way around, and that Candy never was in contact with Mendoza’s office or any CA legislators. Only contact with CA legislators was when she wrote her letters to Senators in support of the bill, as did I, as did you and others who wrote letters in opposition. She mostly blogged about the issue. That was the extent of Candy’s activism on that bill. Dunno where you’re getting your info.

    “To some, this was viewed as harrassment on your part. Take a step back and see how you might feel if it was legislation you were working on, and people contacted your legislators to try and do a smear campaign on your efforts?”

    Having a different political view and blogging about a POLITICAL issue does NOT constitute harassment, Sheri. It’s part and parcel of American politics. McConnell, the holism, a few others, and I also had the same view as Candy’s and blogged about AB 2072. We’re also deaf/ hh, yet Candy got vilified because she’s DOD and part of Deaf culture.

    To have a different personal view on an issue does not justify harassment by others thru a letter-writing campaign at one’s job or workplace. PERIOD.

    That is going over the line, Sheri.

  112. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Honestly Ann, you missed the point. And this talks to Patti’s point too, and that is, intent. Candy intentionally contacted people, whether they contacted her first, is immaterial, deliberately trying to do a smear against certain people involved with the campaign, even w Mendoza’s office and others. That’s going over the line! Alot of it was targeted at Ella. I’m disappointed that Elisa Roche would even bother with Candy who does not even live in California, looking for dirt obviously. This is interesting…thanks for letting me know this info.

    In my opinion, silly for Candy and anyone outside of California, to even send letters to our Senators who upon recieving them, discount any letter that is not in their district, much less a person from out of state.

    I’m all for people having an opinion about an issue. Even to attack an issue. But when it crosses the line to show intent to deliberately smear people, that is where I call the question. I’ve already stated my opinion on the employer aspect, but fair is fair, you need to balance things here Ann. Are you that biased that you can’t understand accountability? It goes to deliberate intent. Accountability -It goes both ways, that’s my point.

    So much for “moral compass” ….

    end of story.

  113. finlake Says:

    Excuse me, but this blog has been nagging in my mind for quite some time (few days, if not a week) as I toil away with my work projects.

    I sincerely believe the root of the problem is this: conformity. It seems like we’re “supposed” to be generous on accepting the diversity of all d/Deaf people. For example, respecting one’s opinion and vice-versa. Yet, we’re still expecting conformity from one another when it comes to political issue(s)? -smh- Truly, I must say FML. (smh = shake my head and FML = frack my life) The huge chasm and divide of our people is an embarassment for me to present to the hearing world. Unity of our people? My ass. It’s not happening nor progressive (if any at all), which is plain as day as presented here.

    “What’s that all about?”
    “Oh, nuthin’, mate. Carry on.”

    For me, I’m too fierce when it comes to my independence and freedom. I call that expectation of conformity our people: corrosion of conformity.

  114. Candy Says:

    I just responed to Sheri at my blog. I am using my phone to do so… so, copying and pasting wud be an hurculean task…

    I’m interested in how ‘malicious’ task has been reached. That is really trippin’

    Ann is correct. I never contacted anyone. Nor have I send any correspondence to any legislators.

    they wud not consider my input anyway since I do not live in CA. It is clearly stated on contact form online in each legislators site.

    the parents whom contacted me were behind the bill. They thanked me for blogging fairly and I asked questions after that. Both have kept me up to date as much as they were able to.

  115. ireflections09 Says:

    Sheri,

    “But when it crosses the line to show intent to deliberately smear people, that is where I call the question. I’ve already stated my opinion on the employer aspect, but fair is fair, you need to balance things here Ann. Are you that biased that you can’t understand accountability? It goes to deliberate intent.”

    Hey, so Ella posts a vlog against AB 2072 and that’s not “deliberate intent”? Candy posts a blog supporting AB 2072, and that is “deliberate intent”? I am truly puzzled.

    Smear campaigns happened on BOTH sides, Sheri. Comes with the territory of taking sides. Anybody can blog about an issue, whether it’s out-of-state or not, sheesh.

    What it comes down to, Sheri, is that you’re still upset that Candy, who is DOD and part of deaf culture, dares to have a different view. She has a right to a different view and to blog about it.

    To hound her at her workplace for having a different view that has nothing to do with her job is still wrong.

  116. ireflections09 Says:

    finlake,

    It’s scary how two ppl can meet on the same plane of thinking, coming from two different viewpoints.

    It’s a good kind of scary. 😉

  117. Karen Mayes Says:

    finlake, you got it right… conformity vs independence.

    Anyway…

    Hmmm… we have had people writing letters to Wisconsin from other states, in regards to the bill calling for health insurance’s full coverage of CI.

    And I did see many people from different states sending letters to California even though they were not residents of CA.

    Hmmm… okay.

  118. Candy Says:

    One other thing, I do not see my blogging as smear. Sheri would have to show examples of that. Ann and I co-blogged a post that was a result of my asking questions about the brochure, history of the brochure, rationale behind drafting AB2072. Everything I blogged about that bill are facts that I can produce. So, there is no way it is a smear. I had gotten many emails from people who were shocked at the ‘dnia statement’. that DNIA statement was ceated by these deaf agencies and it was not an unbiased effortm just as much as DNIA felt that CA coaltion (oral) wasn’t unbiased. The difference between the two are: DNIA has a statement (which they never put back on their site) that advocates for ASL first, other options later…much later.. whereas AB2072 advocate for parents to be ‘in the know’ about all options including ASL. Which was being more inclusive? Which gave parents control?

    Why is DNIA statement no longer in site?? Is it considered bad now?

  119. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Ann,
    Tsk, tsk…what is wrong with you today? Seriously, I don’t appreciate you trying to twist things around and put words where I never said such things as, “because she is DOD, deaf culture, and has a different opinion”. You assume too much. Where’s your moral compass girl? To throw something like that at me, is ridiculous. I’ve already stated having a different view was okay. Do I need to really spell it out? Having a different opinion is OKAY people. Lighten up!

    We got plenty of diverse people with different people right here in California, who come from different backgrounds, hearing or deaf parents, and truly ain’t no expectation of conformity. That is absolutely hilarious, you guys don’t know Californians at all! We already discussed the job thingy. When push comes to shove on another issue, however, there’s no attempt at objectivity re accountability over intent to smear people involved with a campaign. I’m seeing double standards here. No point in me commenting further. This is getting nowhere and we are gonna hafta agree to disagree.

  120. ireflections09 Says:

    Sheri,

    “re accountability over intent to smear people involved with a campaign”

    You need to be specific. Cite examples.

    And I don’t want anybody else here throwing in stuff, just Sheri and Candy. Ya understand, folks?

    To lob that double standards accusation ain’t gonna fly here. You haven’t even given Candy a chance to defend herself.

  121. White Ghost Says:

    Right, Candy @ 7:16 PM

    I went to opposeab2072’s website and could not find the CA DNIA’s statement? Where is it? Removed? Disappeared?

    I saw CA DNIA’s statement by through Candy’s blog sometime ago. Candy, can you dig the name of title that attached to the CA DNIA’s statement. (.pdf)

    I don’t support *mandating* the “first ASL first” case. Hearing parents of hearing infants do have the CHOICE. Hearing parents of deaf/hearing loss infants do have the CHOICE, too. Make it even.

  122. Linda Slovick Says:

    Candy says:
    “Ann is correct. I never contacted anyone. Nor have I send any correspondence to any legislators.”

    http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/14/dear-senator-ab-2072/

    In several of the comments she talks about writing to the senators. Clearly, at the time, she meant to imply that she had actually sent her open letter to those specific senators.

    One commenter even asked her if she signed her name “Candy” when she sent the letter to the senators. Candy did not take this opportunity to explain that her open letter REALLY only appeared on her site.

    The truth has a way of coming out, even when you TRY to suppress it.

    Candy, have you even READ your blogs? 😉 (Humor intended – sorry but, given your history of insistence on this very point, I just couldn’t resist!)

    – Linda

  123. White Ghost Says:

    Linda —

    Why would you need to know about the signature she wrote on the letter to the Senator? That’s none of your business.

    As long as she unveiled the letter to the audience, she did. I did write a letter to a Senator, too. So what?

    Why are you implying on her personal level? That’s none of your business. Who’s on the business? Hers, NOT OURS!

    Huh?

  124. Candy Says:

    (on a break..otherwise next opp. for me to respond is in 3 hrs)

    Here are the questions that need to be answered:

    What triggered Sheri to start smearing my character?

    Sheri has the burden of proof to specifically show how I smeared her/OpposeAb2072/AB2072/ etc.

    How is it that I smeared and the others who blogged about AB2072 didn’t?

    Other bloggers were contacted by someone else in CA, if not all, I wasn’t the only one.

    Sheri created an email group under false pretenses to lure me and Mike into the den of lions (i love cats! so, I wasn’t afraid) only to turn around and jumped her claws on me. Bad bad kitty!

    Truth is, after talking to someone last night, I concurred that it isn’t worth my time to bring up what Ella said to me. But now that I am being smeared by Sheri, I am about to change my mind and reveal what was said in that email group. At one point three people wanted out because Mike was attacked and cornered. So we do have witness to that.

    So what was Sheri’s true motive, I Ask…

    Barry blogged about AB2072..so did Mike…so did Ann C… so did Big Ben Factor…so did many others. I definitely wasn’t the one who originally blogged to support that bill. I was never in communication with any legislators.

    Sheri, why are you out to get me is beyond me. You are making it personal. Please answer these questions. Burden of proof is on you since you started this smear on me.

  125. ireflections09 Says:

    Linda,

    I refer you to my comment at 4:51 pm. I know that Candy sent actual letters of support to the senators. That was her only written correspondence with CA legislators, nothing more. Whether she signed the actual letters with the name Candy or with her real name is irrelevant here.

  126. Candy Says:

    The only letters I send was the Open Letter on my blog. Did they received it? no. did they perchance took a peek at my blog? I don’t know…wouldn’t know. But, I do know that they will NOT consider any letters outside of CA. It says so on their contact form online.

  127. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Huh? Whoa, Candy, now look who’s trippin’? Sorry if my words made you feel alarmed. Not intentional.

    Actually, you’re the one who triggered me. Your comment last night about being “befuddled” was as if the only thing you did was blog about it. That comment alone, did not sit well with me, because IF that was the ONLY thing you did, it would be water off a duck’s back. You already said before you were in touch with Mendoza’s office and other legislators, your blogs on the subject did seem to point to certain individuals you scoffed at, and you’re right, you aren’t even in California, so what gives? So was my thought when I woke up this am. It sure was perceived malicious to us, wondering where you were coming from at times, and etc, but now, thanks to Ann, OIC — Elsa Roche. Well that alone, explains a lot of things to me. I can be as forgiving as the next guy, just wishing you had instead found it in your heart to help us make our arguments stronger, but instead, you really were blogging to help Elsa Roche. That is the part is a real let down. So you still insisting you did not do a smear campaign against certain people opposing ab2072? Hmm. Yes, of course the supporters were relieved it got vetoed. They hated the bill once it got amended with our language asking for parents to be fully informed in which to make a decision! You love that part, and guess what? It was at our request. So were many other good changes we influenced. Never once did you say, “hey kudos gals”! Such changes were posted on our website. Had you really been objective, you would have supported us to make the bill stronger. Sorry, I am not in the mood to spar “tit for tat” with you about this any longer, and Finlake is gonna chop off our heads soon with more “slaves to yesterday”. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers. Nope Ann, I’m not one of those people analyzing and getting hung up on every single word a person says. I’m human and already feeling tired (and crabby) at the end of a long week, esp. listening to everyone argue, and argue, about the past, and here I go and become guilty of doing the same thing today, talking off the cuff. I prolly should’ve added a few adjectives such as “conceptually speaking”, or whatever as it might have helped me be more clearer, eh? Yeah, okay…I’ll concede…SORRY Everybodee!

    I just really had wanted to see some objectivity in this discussion as a whole, as I’m feeling the cyberstalking issue doesn’t become valid when you ask for people to shout out, but you are not willing to do the same when others ask this of you. It just doesn’t sit well with me. You and Ann are being too one sided, and maybe its because it is your blog and hers here. Such discussions should perhaps be done in a nuetral place with neutral people who were not emotionally invested in an issue like AB2072. And frankly that is not my impression of you two, I expected more objectivity and sensitivity toward what others are trying to say, especially because I saw you make several attempts to honestly try. Patti has raised some excellent points, and it would not kill you to agree with her and others sometimes. Where’s your shout out supporting her? Geez, nevermind the fact that I don’t even agree with the concept of the “shout out” at all, but if you are gonna ask, you need to give as well. People say, “Barry”, and you say, “what about this person or that person”. This isn’t being objective, nor supportive. Barry is a smart dude, all it takes is concession to say, “sorry” to the people he has stalked or harrassed. He got some of this same behaviour thrown back at him. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Barry however, has choices. If he chooses not to, that’s his prerogative. Same is true for Ridor, and whoever else people have issues with. No amount of “shout outs” is gonna change a person. In my opinion, I know Barry is watching all this stuff… if he has it in his heart, he will do the right thing, step up, and find resolution with the people he hurt. Otherwise, “cross him off our Christmas list”, ya know? Don’t constantly give attention to a person who chooses to do the wrong thing. Yes, there may be others out there, but don’t befuddle the issue about one person by diluting it to bring up someone else’s name. Tit for tat. This stuff really has to stop.

    You are all intelligent and beautiful people here, pumpin’ iron and all… and hope to see us be the village we need to be….taking positive steps forward….maybe Monday? Lol.

    You know what? Somewhere in the world, happy hour has started….

    Cheers to a restful weekend everyone.

  128. Candy Says:

    Just got home.

    Will respond in a bit….

    Sheri, I read your email. No, I am not alarmed. Just busy as heck. I had a long day and a long commute and long errands I had to run. It has been a long week for many of us, no question about it. I am befuddled with your response, honestly. Even more befuddled that “befuddled” is what triggered your response to me, going so far to smear my character. I do feel the need to respond to everything you just said to me. Then we should be able to move on, unless you have more to say… I understand you might have gotten of the wrong side of the bed this morning. Since you did not take back your accusation of my being malicious with intend…I do need to respond. And, I shall in a bit..

  129. Candy Says:

    Sheri…

    Like I said, I’m not alarmed. If you’re going to accuse someone of being malicious, you need to provide specifics and point to evidence. You did not do that. That was irresponsible of you.

    “Thanks to Ann, OIC – Elsa Roche”

    I mentioned that I received information from her back then in one of the comments on my blog:

    http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/2010/06/20/ab2072-it-takes-away-what-nothing/#comment-3033

    We were not blogging to help Elisa Roche. I had blogged about it at first and never had heard of Elisa Roche. When she compliment me on writing a balanced article, she offered to provide me answers to any questions I had. I took that opportunity to ask her how/why AB2072 was written. Asked her about the brochure, and then she referred me to someone else who had more knowledge on the history behind the brochure. That was quite interesting because the original brochure was very biased and created by Let Them Hear foundation. Karl White refused to use that brochure and requested that it include all modalities (that was before AB2072 had happened.) So the history of how that brochure was created was explained by Ann_C and myself on “Plant A Seed” blog.

    I asked and got answers from them. I also asked you questions, if you can remember. Your answers are on that post as well. I wanted to be as fair as possible, but you were not willing to share much as Elisa did. There was NOTHING malicious on Elisa’s part and if there were investigation on that, I can assure you that our conversations were questions and answers and when Ann and I were done with that post, the only other information I recieved from Elisa were updates. I was notified that you send a letter to everyone where you stated you refuse to work with them anymore. I was notified when one of the organization was willing to meet with Elisa, she was hopeful about it and shared the good news when it happened and shared the bad news when it happened as well. They were always short and concise. Should it ever happen that Elisa and my emails are ever scrutinized, you will find there is integrity in our emails. That much I can validate.

    The way I blogged was based on MY opinion and how I felt about the bill. I was not helping anyone and that is God’s honest truth.

    If you are going to accuse me of smear campagin against certain people opposing AB2072, you better point to it, by specifically telling me exactly what I said and where that statement is found, because your accusation is slanderous. So, I am challenging you to come up with that evidence.

    Sheri, did you ever go to CAA’s website? Have you ever seen CAA’s letter to the Terminator requesting a VETO? If you compare their letter to what the Terminator said, you will see that the bill was terminated MOSTLY based on CAA’s request.

    As for KUDOS. Are you kidding? I sure did. Patti mentioned that it was nice to see my kudos to the opposition here:

    http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/ab-2072-aftermath-of-the-storm-passed/#comment-3379

    Here is my kudos to the opposition comment:

    http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/ab-2072-aftermath-of-the-storm-passed/#comment-3339

    I did shout outs on Barry and Ben at Deaf Jeff’s blog. I said, I don’t approve of any of it.

    I have agreed with Patti on a few things. Again, you assume things. Which tells me you do not read everything. So, perhaps you need to hold your tongue and read up on things before makinig an assumptions out of a mole hill. I don’t have to conform to other people’s view every time, just because he/she is deaf.

    I have said two wrongs don’t make it right often…. I have said it on my most recent post as well.

    You may have gotten off the wrong side of the bed this morning, that much I can sympathize with you. You may have had a long tiring week, and I can relate. However, your accusation towards me was uncalled for and I do see it as smearing of my character and yes, I do expect an apology from you. I have provided evidence that proves my point.

    Am I willing to forgive? yeah, I guess so. It is in my nature to do so. But, that depends on whether you are willing to take back every smearing thing you said about me. Then again, the trust I have for you is getting real thin. Trust is earned, Sheri. But…time will heal….

  130. Candy Says:

    Linda…

    When I stated:

    “Just relaying information that was shared with me. Yes, Mendoza’s camp is relieved. ”

    Mendoza’s camp = Elisa Roche Mendoza’s camp is a generalization. If I had contact with Mendoza, I would have said it. If I had contact with anyone in Mendoza’s office, I would have said Mendoza’s office. But, I didn’t. Elisa worked with Tony Mendoza on that bill, ergo, Mendoza’s camp. Hope this clarifies things. If I did have contact with Mendoza or his office or the legislators, I would come out and say it. But, I didn’t. You don’t know me. So, I understand you find it hard to believe what I say only because you don’t like me. That’s understandable. Nothing I can do about it. But, Please don’t put words in my mouth. It reflects on you.

    As I have stated to Sheri, above, Elisa does keep me up to date with the latest. Elisa is the only person from Mendoza’s camp that I am in touch with, unless one would consider Karl White a part of that team.

    The truth is I was never in touch with Mendoza, his office nor any of the legislators. And, you seem to have a hard time with it.

    Karl White provided me with information on the history of the brochure, which was documented via email and attachments which I also shared with Ann_C. Karl White was a consultant for Mendoza’s camp on AB2072, I believe. If he is part of Mendoza’s camp, then it would be two individuals. Both are not part of Mendoza’s office. Ergo, I decided to use the term “Mendoza’s camp.”

    In regards to Dear Senator : AB2072

    You can see that it says “open letter to California Senators”

    Typically open letter is what it is, self explanatory.

    Yes, I do read my blog. Absolutely. So, today I read it again.

    Nowhere does it say that I had send these letters to the Senators directly either. That was my letter. Truth is, I never send them a letter by snail mail and I did not send it via email, nor did I send it via website contact form.

    Does writing an open letter on my blog mean I had direct contact with them? no it doesn’t. Again, your point is quite off and it reflects on you.

  131. Linda Slovick Says:

    Apparently I wasn’t the only one who came away with the impression that you had actually sent the letters. Ann_C also remembered it as you sending them.

    Good to know that you weren’t THAT crazy after all!

    Rather than demanding an apology from Sheri, you might consider that she was there in the trenches and could teach you a bit about what it was like actually BEING there.

    A lot of your posts were pretty inflamatory about what “the opposition” wanted to do to those poor babies and parents. You kept insisting we believed things like:

    “ASL ONLY, first. Then add in all modalities.

    That is why the opposition is against AB2072. It is because they already had a plan to change the code. They do not want any parent to make decisions for their child.

    Not now, perhaps later.

    Initially, all parents will have to submit to have their child learn ASL. After their child has gain fluent skill in ASL, they are then free to choose and add in any other options to their liking.”

    When we tell you, no, NOT ASL-only, and no need to wait for fluency in one language to begin another… You quickly forget we said that and go back to saying we mean what YOU say.

    I can understand that you are often stating your opinion, but look at the blogs through the eyes of somebody trying to figure out when it’s your opinion and when it’s a known fact. You are too often mixing your opinions into the fact part of your discussion without labeling them as just your opinion about what the opposition actually believes.

    So maybe if you stop mixing opinions and facts when talking about your opposition, you’d recognize that Sheri IS your opposition… She’s bound to become a bit befuddled by your characterization of her views, and likely to feel that you INTEND to insult her with your dogged insistence that, no, whatever she actually SAID, she really believes what YOU said…

    In my opinion, your blogs have spent a LOT of time arguing against a strawman of your own making.

    Talk to Sheri as an equal and don’t presume that she owes you an apology because you misunderstood her… Notice that each of you kind of feels that way?

    What if you understood each other? Videophone chat? Maybe you could meet your REAL opposition, and be a whole lot less afraid of us.

    – Linda

  132. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Hello Candy,

    Your response, shows your effort to try and clear up some things. Thanks, I appreciate your effort.

    I have offered to VP with you to discuss our view about this bill, to hopefully help you understand our position better. Here once again, I feel stuck having to explain many things in written English, which will not be all inclusive of how I am feeling and all that needs to be said. Impossible. Sometimes things said may be misunderstood. So here I go, of course at the risk of being misunderstood by you and your friends here because this is NOT a neutral blog nor objective, and or you coming back confrontational again. MY intentions are good. I don’t know anymore about yours. I ask that you view in concept of what I am trying to get at as a whole. So read on, as it is a long response, with intent to find resolutions.

    Yesterday, I came back in my second response on this issue, made an effort to clarify that is how you were PERCIEVED, that you conducted a smear campaign against us, and now you twist it to be about you? Why do you do this??? Isn’t it obvious we need help understanding your actions against our opposition to this bill? Why can’t you see, that perhaps from our perspective, your blatant connection with Elsa, one of the core supporters of the original bill, is in fact clear indication of your bias toward the bill from beginning to end? This is how it feels to me.

    I wish you would have asked instead, “how can I help you and others feel better about me?” Mine was not an accusation the way you are making it sound. My comment was with the intention to help you understand how we felt, and the desire to see things we are doing reported objectively. That’s my biggest beef. You were not objective in your writings about this bill entirely. Furthermore, I’ve already said I didn’t do a good job explaining this yesterday. Did you offer to help me out? No. Instead, you launch on a negative response to make it all about you, to try and put me down. Honestly, how is this helping?? You also threw terrible unfounded accusations at me re: my sincere and honest hard effort to sincerely bring a variety of ppl together in a group email, for a dialogue with an idea to address the cyber stalking issue. I thanked you and all for participating as I felt it was helpful. Ppl need time to air out differences, but it was a good start. Despite the recent, “oh shit its friday and we are still arguing”, we are making progress. My point for bringing this up now is that I sensed you were pissed and feeling paranoid. Linda, bless her, is trying to help you see this too. She has good intentions, she wants resolutions, her way is asking a lot of questions. She nor I would be here if we did not care. I could have said to you, “get off your high horse Candy!” But that would have set you off in the defensive mode. Contrary to how you might be feeling, I’m not interested in doing that. I asked you to take a step back to see how you might be saying things that bring comments to create friction as that is what I have tried to do. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

    I did apologize in my first sentence in my second email clarifying that if my explanation caused you to feel alarmed (or upset), that was not my intention, nor is anyone out to get you. I could have given you numerous examples of where you have said things that cause this perception that it felt malicious but I did not because my motive was not to put you in a corner and demand an apology from you. Maybe you need reassurance that we wish to come to an understanding, we want to work together. It gets hard to do this when you keep bringing up things, or making statements which put us on the defense. For example, you brought up the CAA, what’s this have to do with anything? You felt the need to throw that in your response. To me that’s out of line with what we are talking about here. My point in bringing this up as an example is to share, it would have been helpful if you had just stated, the bill was vetoed and both sides are relieved. THAT’S a balanced view. That’s objectivity. And THAT’S my point. You feel you are being fair, but it is not how you are coming across to us.

    On this issue of AB 2072, if I felt you were really going to listen and finally understand I would explain things. But your accusatory responses is indicative of our experience, no matter what we say, it feels as if you want to slam our opinions. If this is not your intention, kindly let me know.
    Concept of perception here, I am patiently trying to explain to you in a general sense without being too specific because it is not my wish to spar with you over semantics. I am feeling now anything I say, you are dead set to come back with an argumentative rebuttal. Tit for tat. I’m not interested in this with you. I don’t have that kind of time either. I am making the time right now, out of respect for the fact that you took the time to develop your responses to me. Obviously you cared enough to share all that you did.

    I’m sorry I was not able to give you constant updates like Elsa did. I honestly did not have the luxury of time to rebuttal all your points on a public blog. I have told you this before. I know the truth of what happened and same is true for the CDNIA core team. We lived thru it, far more than you and Elsa did. She quit being visibly involved after last June. The bill was no longer “theirs”, it became steered strongly by the health committee to get input from both, and force Mendoza to work with us better. Elsa may not know everything that happened after that point. Bits and pieces via Mendoza’s office doesn’t explain the story fully either. And nope, I didn’t say in my letter that we refused to “work with them” (your words). I clearly said we would not work with him–Mendoza after three horrible meetings with him having temper tantrums, and childish behavior. YOU have no clue!!! Elsa fully knows this herself and acknowledged to me after the meeting that she understood why we felt this way.

    Your kudos included one tiny thing, thanks, but there was a great deal of changes made to that bill based on our arguments, which the Senators took to make the bill better which you, and your friends here, would have been impressed. I was hoping to educate you about our view of the process we went thru, why we opposed, why their brochure was indeed biased. Even Elsa told me she understood why we felt it was biased. Us being Deaf, you would think has nothing to do with it, but it does, this bias you had, created a division. Any division in our community hurts you and me both.

    In summary, I can see that you cared enough to want to “prove your point” that there was no malice involved. You appear to honestly feel that what you were doing was right by your standards, and no intentions to smear anyone. Thank you. This helps me understand you better now.

    This discussion about AB 2072 was not my intent when I reached out to you and others to come together over a week ago. Everyone may have felt a bit nervous perhaps, but everyone did expressed the same interest to stop the cyber stalking, and harassment. Intentions were good. My focus was genuinely interested in bridging the divide, to ask us to focus on an issue, one that we can agree on, rather than one we cannot. Why? Because I like and trust the ppl I asked to join in good faith that we could produce something positive together. Many in the group appreciated this effort. A great many are worried, the negativity and attacks will continue. I believe we all care enough, not to let this happen anymore, as long as we all continue work with and talk to each other. I believe anything is possible as long as we put our minds to it.

    I saw on the news discussion about bullies, reporter was interviewing kids who were bullies, who became so because they thought it was “cool” The reporter stated, something that I thought was real interesting: “Bullies became bullies because they decided to target others, in order to avoid being targeted themselves”.

    I thought this was rather profound and rather indicative of the cycle of oppression we see happening in our deaf blogosphere. It would be interesting to examine this further.

    In closing, you may not have liked how I said things, I have apologized, and I certainly have expressed how I didn’t like how you have said things. You could apologize. I asked, that next time I say something that may appear off, perhaps nudge me jokingly ask if I got up on the wrong side of bed or something – – as a hint to help me see I need to be more clear. Once again, I appreciate your efforts to clear up the negative perception. I hope you can appreciate my effort here as well. I hope we can agree, it is not going to be productive discussing this bill. I would however, like to see us continue to talk about the cyber-stalking and in taking preventive measures along with other issues where we may find a common ground.

    Thank you.

  133. deafa Says:

    hmmmm, who cares?

    I guess everyone feel threatened because people rarely hire deaf people these days.

  134. ireflections09 Says:

    Just returned from a busy day, I apologize if any one’s comment was kept waiting.

  135. Candy Says:

    Sheri…

    Thank you for apologizing. It is not about how I don’t like how you said things, it has more to do with how you accused me of things that was not true.

    When you accused me of smear campaign, you made it all about me, not I.

    When I blog about controversial stuffs, it is based on my own research and whatever information I can get to show how I have reached the conclusion that I had. In that case, I tried to show a balanced view by presenting each side’s view based on the information that was evidenced, whether it was documents, vlogs, etc. And, for one blog that Ann and I co blogged on, it was from Elisa, Karl and You, Sheri. What I say isn’t necessarily absolute. It is MY opinion and MY view. I had NO influence on the outcome of AB2072 at all. None whatsoever.

    It is not about Ella at all. She did vlog about the newborn hearing detection screening REFORM, correct? And, based on the information she gave out, I disagreed with the task force’s recommendations. When I found out about the DNIA statement which is similar to what Ella explained about the task force, I disagreed with the task force’s recommendation. I have every right to disagree with the task force for newborn hearing screening reform’s recommendation that Ella shared. It’s not about Ella. It’s about the NHDS reform. And, It’s about DNIA statement, that I disagree with. I don’t know how simple I can get. I have made it very clear so many times on my blog. Ella just so happened to be the person that shared that recommendation.

    You said:

    “I could have given you numerous examples of where you have said things that cause this perception that it felt malicious but I did not because my motive was not to put you in a corner and demand an apology from you.”

    Next time show exactly what I said and where I said it. This is important because sometimes people think they remembered what they read or someone tells them what someone said, if you had gone back to check on what was really said, you might find that you were wrong or maybe even right!. It has happen to me several times where I thought I remembered what someone said, but to be on the safe side, I will go back and check only to find that it wasn’t what I thought. Do show me evidence. How can it be cornering? Especially if you have evidence that I said something. With me, Sheri, I’m not some fragile person, I can handle the truth even if it hurts. I am that tough, okay? 😉

    You said:

    “For example, you brought up the CAA, what’s this have to do with anything?”

    “My point in bringing this up as an example is to share, it would have been helpful if you had just stated, the bill was vetoed and both sides are relieved. THAT’S a balanced view. That’s objectivity. “

    I brought up CAA to clarify the truth because you said “Yes, of course the supporters were relieved it got vetoed. They hated the bill once it got amended with our language asking for parents to be fully informed in which to make a decision! You love that part,and guess what? It was at our request.” But the truth is, guess what? it was at CAA’s request. That is why I asked you if you ever saw the letter that CAA send to the Terminator.

    First off, I never blogged on the VETO of the bill. If I had, who knows what I would have said. Where did you get that I wasn’t objective about the bill being vetoed? As for comments, what you’re asking me to do is to have this “group think”. I think for myself and I have my opinions, ergo my comments reflects my perception. And, my perception is just my perception.

    The bill’s original intend from the start was all about keeping parents fully informed of all communication options which also include ASL and, the way you said what you said (above, copied and pasted from your comment) appear to indicate that the supporters did not want the bill to keep parents fully informed in order to make a decision. That is not true, Sheri. The bill was about keeping the parents informed in order to make decisions. See what I mean, maybe you didn’t understand the bill’s intend in the first place because it seemed like (my perspection here) the focus by the opposition was who were behind the bill, rather than what the bill was all about. I don’t know, but that is what it appears to be. It is these kind of misconceptions that I tend to clear up on my blog because it’s not true based on what I have seen in print on the pdf of AB2072.

    You said:

    I’m sorry I was not able to give you constant updates like Elsa did.

    Why should you be sorry? Did you understand why I said that? You accused me of helping her out and you accused me of smear campaign, You thought I had malicious intend. So, I shared the kind of “relationship” we had to show you that there was no malice involved. I would suggest you re read my comment again slowly. I had to read yours several times to be sure I understood what you’re saying.

    You said:

    you had, created a division. Any division in our community hurts you and me both.

    Sheri, be careful what you are accusing me of. I did not cause the division. it is really easy to agree to disagree. You are taking my blogging way too serious. I did not cause the division. If I had not blogged, the division would still be there because there will be deaf people that will support the bill and there will be deaf people that will not, whether I blogged about it or not.

    You said:

    “Linda, bless her, is trying to help you see this too. She has good intentions, she wants resolutions, her way is asking a lot of questions.”

    Really? About the senator’s letter? If I had send them letters, how would it be any different from any other people that send them letters? I remember the opposition asking everyone to send letters. Shawn Elfrink vlogged and said she send a whole bunch of letters. So did many other people, who were against AB2072. And, many people also send letters in support of the bill. Linda has good intentions? Really?

    Well, Sheri…if I had send letters out, I have every right to, btw. But apparently in Linda’s mind, based on your accusation is that if I had contacted the legislators (via letters, for example), then I must have had a malicious intend and was on a smear campaign. So, are you saying that anyone else who supported the bill and wrote letters to the legislators had malicious intend and are on a smear campaign? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Luckily I didn’t send out letters, but if I had I would have had every right to just as a lot of other people did. I don’t know why I was singled out as being intent to maliciously going on a smear campaign.

    Linda said: “Good to know that you weren’t THAT crazy after all!” When it was clear that I didn’t send any letters. Does that mean those that did are crazy? Would you characterize Linda as having good intentions in resolution?

    This whole thing has me shaking my head. It’s no wonder finlake felt like he was going crazy reading the comments on Ann_C’s blog.

    Anyway, Thank you for apologizing for accusing me of maliciously going on a smear campaign with intend. It is clear that I did not which you also agree now.

    As for that email group, can I offer a suggestion? That is a big group and things can and do get out of control as you have seen. My suggestion is to have a ground rule set up first before going on with the feedback and discussion on coming up with a project to stop the bullying online.

  136. Linda Slovick Says:

    Those from out of state that sent letters to California’s legislature were acting with an excess of zeal. What’s so hard to understand about that?

    At the time, you implied you had sent them, and did not deny having sent them when asked about your signature, so I wasn’t the only one who came away thinking you had done such a crazy thing.

    Where Candy went beyond stating her opinions as opinions, she went beyond what she actually knew about the situation. This occurs over and over again in her characterization of what “the opposition” believed. Since Sheri was actually there, and did not recognize herself in the highly-negative description that was completely resistant to any correction, it is unsurprising that she found this to be an intentional smear campaign.

    Are you saying that you will accept correction when your opinions of the people who make up your opposition do not fit your stereotype of them?

    Candy needs more carefully to separate her opinions about other people’s beliefs from the facts. She needs to do this in her blogs, but ESPECIALLY in the comments of other people’s blogs where, for some reason, she more often “takes the gloves off” about people she does not really know…

    Simple fix, no?

    – Linda

  137. ireflections09 Says:

    Dunno why the bolding is going haywire here. Linda’s comment was not in bold when I published it. :\

    First of all, anyone including Candy can blog their opinion on an issue. An opinion stands up better when there are facts cited. Those cites go back to sources, be it another’s v/blog, scholarly research, a person’s quotes, news already reported, etc.

    Secondly, the opposition wasn’t just all Sheri and the Oppose 2072 group, there were others also v/blogging their opposing views and beliefs. Perhaps Sheri took the generic term “opposition” to mean just her and the Oppose2072 group? That’s taking it personally as a “smear campaign” and hence, “malicious intent”? I find that just ridiculous.

    Lastly, AB 2072 is done and over with, folks. Move on, please!

  138. ireflections09 Says:

    Sheesh, this bolding is really nutsy today.

  139. Candy Says:

    Bolding is probably my fault!!! I messed up on the bolding in my last comment. Try this. Go to my comment, edit it. at the very end of my comment type this! maybe that will work?

    🙂

    Yes it is done and over with. Time to move on.

  140. ireflections09 Says:

    Got the bolding glitch in comments fixed. 😉

  141. Sheri A Farinha Says:

    Ann, not all of us have the luxury of time to compile a bunch of stuff. This blog entry is about having a moral compass. I expect general comments to be respected, and to demonstrate the moral compass. I have used myself in several examples, to show how things can be misunderstood.

    Candy, here is a statement you made in a comment section, “I have succeeded in making sure that the state of CA will never ever consider CA DNIA’s statement in its entirety and that is the most important part. To ensure all parents are aware of ALL communication options. How do you communicate, Linda? In ASL, of course.”

    Succeeded, how?

    As for the group email? I’m sorry to see you didn’t have the decency to apologize for your own inflammatory remarks or accusation to me.

  142. Candy Says:

    Sheri…

    To answer your question, anyone who comes across my blog “What It Is All About : The Truth Behind Opposing AB2072” (link below) will find links.

    http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/06/what-it-is-all-about-the-truth-behind-opposing-ab2072/

    My blog has links to the actual PDF of “DNIA Statement” that was on the OpposeAB2072 website which I had downloaded to read. On my post, there is a link to the actual page where the pdf is found, but that page is no longer there. I was told that the original OpposeAB2072 had either crashed or was torn down. A new OpposeAB2072 website was created but does not contain the “DNIA statement” anymore (not that I could find.) I also have a link on that post, to the screen shot of the original pdf statement on the original OpposeAB2072 site.

    All that is on my blog, within the post I stated above. That is how I have succeeded in ensuring that people are aware of the DNIA statement. At the time the post was published, I received many emails from both deaf readers and hearing parents expressing shock over the DNIA statement. I guess that is what I was referring to. The links are there for anyone to read. Both the deaf readers and hearing parents are not upset about ASL, they are upset with the idea that recommendations would make it so that ASL takes precedent over other modalities as is outlined in the DNIA statement – ASL mandated for all deaf babies first while other modalities cannot be considered until the child is fluent in ASL. That approach takes the power away from parents. However, after talking with a few anti AB2072 privately, they agreed that parents should have the final say. Thus, the idea of information being shared with parents should show equal information on all modalities which I know you agree with, Sheri. Information on ASL should be on par with information on CI, for example. Currently, it is clear that we both agree to that – information shared with parents to keep them informed should show information on ASL that is on par with information on other modalities.

    As for the group email. You want me to apologize to you for this comment I made?:

    “Sheri created an email group under false pretenses to lure me and Mike into the den of lions (i love cats! so, I wasn’t afraid) only to turn around and jumped her claws on me. Bad bad kitty!”

    Okay, I apologize for saying that you lured me into the email group under false pretenses. You may not have done it intentionally. However that is how it felt to me. You have to admit, you could have made sure the group was evenly divided which represents those of the opposing views. It could have been smaller. There should have been ground rules. Someone should have been in charge to make sure no one goes off track.

  143. ireflections09 Says:

    “There should have been ground rules.”

    Ok, I know I’m not in this so-called email group, whatever, on the cyberbullying issue.

    I suggest one ground rule: bury the hatchet.

    Stop dragging up the past, no more of this “he said, she said”.

    No more sin of omission.

    I’m closing comments, as I gotta get on with my life after a week of monitoring this blog article.

    Thank you to y’all for your insightful and thoughtful comments.

    Ann_C

  144. ireflections09 Says:

    Comment section is closed.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: