Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Still looking for clarification. . .

I can't help it. I'm still confused. Why? Here's how I see it.


A DeafRead blogger was kicked off DeafRead because she violated a guideline.
Which part of the guideline did she violate?

A highlighted link takes us here: http://blog.sponsoredreviews.com/?p=40 to a site that is NOT EVEN CONNECTED TO DEAFREAD OR POSTED IN THE DEAFREAD GUIDELINES

"6. Disclose professional relationships: if you work for a company or institution disclose it on the “About” page. Explicitly declare that the views expressed on the blog are yours and not the ones from your employer (unless you are blogging for that employer, obviously)."


The blogger was kicked off DeafRead because she supposedly violated this non-existent "guideline" that isn't printed anywhere in DeafRead.

AND in fact-- she didn't actually violate the non-existent guideline at all. Because?? She is not employed. She is a student. She blogs voluntarily for a cause, not for a particular company, and not for money.

Why should she have divulged "professional" connections that didn't exist?? But wait. . . She WAS upfront about the purpose of her blog all along. No one can say she didn't divulge her "connections." Anyone who read her blog knew what they were.

Anyway she didn't have to formally say anything about it, since the above blurb wasn't printed anywhere in the DeafRead guidelines. Right? Wrong!

Nevermind-- not important. Moving on.

Let's look at what it really says in the guidelines.

"6) Commerical Sites
We do not link to commerical sites for the purpose of generating profit, other than our own (we have expenses to cover!). "

Hmmmm. . . So that means commercial sites that exist for the purpose of generating profit are not allowed.

Oh, but wait. Her blog site doesn't generate any profit. It's not a commercial site. It's a personal blog that doesn't have any ads or sell anything, except a book in which all proceeds go to a non-profit organization. All expenses come right out of the blogger's own pocket. Commercial??

Here's a commercial blog that hasn't been kicked off DeafRead--
http://www.i711.com/my711.php?tab=2&article=245

Here's another--
http://www.joeybaer.com/

And another--
http://www.ascdeaf.com/blog/


I'm sure there are at least a dozen more. Why haven't THESE sites been taken down??

Oh well, we've been told, it's OK to blog commercially for profit. In fact it's OK to put ads all over your blog. A person has to make a living, right? The only time it's not OK is if you volunteer to blog as part of a support network for the deaf, then fail to disclose that you're blogging professionally when you actually aren't, since you don't make any money. That's NOT OK!!! Never, ever do that. Never!! Or you will be kicked off!!

And also-- DeafRead can kick off any blogger at any time for failing to adhere to rules that don't exist in DeafRead. deaf people are expected to read ALL rules everywhere ALL over the blogosphere and adhere to every single one. If not, you get the boot. This is called kicking off slimy, shameless, deaf pigs.

And by the way, it's TOTALLY OK to call deaf people names.

Guideline number 8 doesn't apply to Deaf people when calling deaf people names. It ONLY applies when deaf people call Deaf people names. Here it is in full. Familiarize yourself.

"8) Name Calling and Discrimination
DeafRead is enjoyed by all kinds of people worldwide ranging from children to senior citizens. It is also safe to assume that people from all races enjoy DeafRead. We will not post anything that is an attack on a specific race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orienation, age or religion. This offense is serious and the offending blog will be promptly considered for removal from DeafRead's subscription."

So there you have it! Name-calling is a serious infraction only if you're deaf.

You see, it is a great privilege to belong to DeafRead if you are only deaf, not Deaf. Deaf people RULE. They have been more than fair in "allowing" deaf people to post their blogs in DeafRead. deaf people have no business complaining if they get kicked off or aren't accommodated. It is extremely hard to accommodate deaf people since many of them talk, and might have once been hearing people. Hearing people are slime. Long, long ago some of them made Deaf people try to act like seals. That was very bad and all of them are shameless pigs in disguise.

I hear you loud and clear DeafRead editors.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Holy cow! (well, while we're on the topic of barnyard animals :) )

Well put, Kim. I see it the very same way.

Valerie said...

Well said. I'm next to go. I posted my question to deafread editors. They don't earn the D.

Your bookmarked on my favorites. Come see me, we will just have our own community.
Val

OCDAC said...

It's Tayler's brazeness. There's more aggregators popping up and deafread's influence is shrinking big time.

Lets not be crying about it and move onto other aggregators.

Richard

Abbie said...

I don't get the method to Tayler's madness at all. All of the sudden all these imaginary policies are popping up all over the place. He is trying to say that since Rachel is engaged as volunteer for CAN which is a support group for CI's that she has disclosed BUT she did not disclose that CAN is a part of Cochlear Corp!

A simple search would have cleared that right up.

They have no disclosure policy listed either. I don't feel the obligation to disclose my personal or professional affiliations to the 650 blogs on there.

You are kicking ass and taking names Kim :)

Kim said...

I've sent a letter to JJ to find out why this blog post wasn't published to DeafRead. I'm still on their blog list. Haven't asked to be removed. I posted it 11 hours ago.

At first, I thought maybe Tayler would eventually realize his errors, then I thought maybe the DeafRead editors would step in and put a stop to all this.

Now I'm just really pissed off at all of them for their silence and Tayler's arrogant comments in Anonymous Deaf Law Student's blog.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Kim!

I am pissed, too.

Things have turned into ugly in Deaf Law Student's blog.

Hugs,

One of Your Pinky Gang. :-)

White Ghost

Anonymous said...

I seconded Richard from OCDAC.

Let's not be crying about it and move onto to other or build another aggregator.

Let's get out of Deafread now!

Mike

Anonymous said...

Move over to www.hear-for-life.org so don't worry about deafread.com anymore!

Kim said...

I intend to be a thorn in their side for a little while longer. I don't need DeafRead OR Sprint. In fact, I hope we all let Sprint know just how upset we are that they support a blog aggregator that practices blatant discrimination against deaf people.

Kim said...

I've just sent a complaint to Sprint. I hope you all do the same.

Anonymous said...

They are apparently asking for us (DR editors) to respond on Taylor's official blog on it. However it's a wordpress blog and asking for a password to leave a comment. As I'm not a wordpress blogger, I can't do that.

However, if I can work out how, I'm thinking of starting an aggregator myself - Will be talking to someone later today about it.

Cheers
Robyn

Candy said...

Good post, Kim!

I agree, it appears certain people can call others names and there's certain people that can't. Ain't right.

Kim said...

Robyn--COOL!!! I don't think it's because it's a wordpress blog that you need a password.

I don't really care what they ask anyway. It's MY blog. I can post whatever the hell I want! I'm about ready to drop DeafRead. I want my message to stay up there for awhile, but I'm adding all my favs to my GoogleReader, so I won't have to come into DR anymore.

David said...

Great Post Kim, and thank you!

Sam said...

I wonder if the name I called Talyar got me kicked down to the inactive section....LOL. By the way I didn't call him a name...I called him bleepforbleep. That is not a name; its a description!

Dy said...

Now I"m wondering if my blog will be removed because there are posts stating that I use a COCHLEAR brand CI, that I also use a MOTOROLA brand cell phone...would that be considered commercial? Is that the next step - that we can't even mention brand names unless they're Sprint?

Kim said...

Hi Dyniece,
I doubt you or anyone else has anything to fear. Although they deny this had anything to do with Rachel, it's obvious she was booted off because of her views. It's terribly upsetting to those of us who see things differntly than Deaf culture. You've brought up a good point. If Tayler is willing to bend the rules that much to get rid of someone, just how far will he go??

Kim said...

Hi Sam,
I saw what you called him. hahaha!And you're right. We don't need DeafRead.

OCDAC said...

I havent been at my aggregator much this week due to my left thumb being 'smashed' at a freak accident. Its getting better. But getting stoned on pain killers isnt my thing so i gotta live with the pain.