Home > Vlog > Clarify Deafread Guidelines

Clarify Deafread Guidelines

September 13, 2007

Click to view


Transcription unavailable

Categories: Vlog
  1. September 14, 2007 at 6:59 am


    Your point was clear in the previous blog. I am not sure why the topic of plagarism was brought up. *shrugs*

    By the way, my husband knows you and your family. He went to ISD with you all. 🙂 He wants me to tell you a big hello! He doesnt use internet that much.

  2. Shawn R.
    September 14, 2007 at 7:03 am

    Ha ha ha ha! Hilarious! I like the shaky and repeating “off the point” scene of the video. Really Deaf videos are getting creative!! Thanks.

    Shawn R.

  3. September 14, 2007 at 7:14 am

    Hey guys, be careful about criticizing DeafRead. They will blacklist you so fast it will make your head spin.

    I criticized them in April for rejecting a blog that was very much within their guidelines, and since then they have refused to post a single one of my entries.

    You might want to read my blog entry, “We Need a Better DeafRead” …


  4. White Ghost
    September 14, 2007 at 7:34 am

    The thing is that I do not understand Deafread’s poor judgment on these v/bloggers’ entries. All they think that your entry is possible plagiarizing. But it was not.

    At this point, there are thousands of v/bloggers who can speak or write for themselves on many issues.

    For example, President Bush’ annoucement on cutting the troops in Iraq on TV last night, I am pretty sure that there are thousands of b/vloggers who individually post in their own b/vlogs on the *SAME* issue. This is the freedom of speech.

    I am pretty sure that there are thousands of fans to set up their own bookmarks. As a result, deafread cannot have the right to control the fans’ bookmarks.

    Think about it…..

    I honestly do not think that the deafread can handle on these same issues from several v/bloggers. They also have not doing their job carefully.

    That is something that I do not understand.

    White Ghost

  5. Richard Roehm
    September 14, 2007 at 7:44 am

    Confucius is exciting isn’t it?


  6. Wondered Too
    September 14, 2007 at 8:09 am

    Maybe Deafread is afraid of Mike McConnell because he has a vile reputation just like democrats are afraid of Moveon.org and let them control the democratic party.

  7. Lisa Marie
    September 14, 2007 at 10:11 am

    Maybe Taylor and Mike are best friends, who knows???

  8. Billythegoat
    September 14, 2007 at 10:32 am

    LMAO, love your special effect.

  9. September 14, 2007 at 11:16 am

    The main topic of “Deafread: Guidelines mix-up?” is about why his post was moved to DeafRead Extra. The reason is for copyright violations.

    If JFLMad wants to know why DeafRead published several posts by one blogger regarding Matt Hamill, it is because the blogger discussed different issues (about Hamill) each time. It is just like we publish several Cochlear Implant posts. As long as they discuss different things or bring new viewpoints, they are OK. They shouldn’t be “near duplicates”. We can make this clearer in the Guidelines.

  10. Billythegoat
    September 14, 2007 at 11:26 am

    Tayler, you are not supposed to put his topic in Deafread Extra at first place. That is what your deafread guidelines say,

    3) Pastes or Re-posts

    For example, if someone wants to paste an entire article from the New York Times on their blog site, it won’t be posted on DeafRead. However, it is accepted practice to paste a few relevant excerpts and, at the bottom, link to the article. We strongly recommend properly citing sources.

    See, you screw it up a big time. Why don’t you admit that you made a mistake? Now you look like a fool.

  11. September 14, 2007 at 11:38 am

    Tom Willard, as a publisher and writer, you are especially sensitive about plagiarism. In fact, you are better qualified than any of us to be a anti-plagiarism spokesperson. If DeafRead removes Fookem and Bug from subscription and you do not agree, I would not know what to think.

    White Ghost, DeafRead has, from day one, encouraged people to subscribe to their favorite blogs’ RSS feed. However, DeafRead isn’t being given credit for giving blogs the exposure they enjoy today. I highly doubt many blogs would have reached their popularity levels if not for DeafRead. But that is not DeafRead’s purpose. DeafRead’s purpose is to promote the deaf blogosphere’s growth (by introducing new blogs almost daily) and robustness (by filtering for deaf-related content).

    It is a tremendous challenge to advertise a new blog, DeafRead makes this very easy and quick.

  12. September 14, 2007 at 11:41 am

    Billythegoat, Fookem and Bug’s “Matt Hamill lost by decision” post was moved to DeafRead Extra because it contained an article that was copied and pasted in its entirety. The citation alone isn’t enough.

  13. Billythegoat
    September 14, 2007 at 12:30 pm

    Can you read the ENGLISH?

    For example, if someone wants to paste an entire article from the New York Times on their blog site, it won’t be posted on DeafRead.

    You said it very clearly, ‘it won’t be posted on Deafread if someone wants to paste an entire article from the New York Times on their blog site.

    And you still put it in Deafread Extra. WHY? I don’t want to hear your lame excuse, face the truth.

  14. Billythegoat
    September 14, 2007 at 12:32 pm

    Tom Willard, you ROCK.

  15. Mary Jane
    September 14, 2007 at 1:00 pm

    Billy the Goat or shall I call you Bully the Goat?

    Look, your approach is nasty. It is Can you read English not Can you read the English as you wrote.

    From my understanding DeafRead and DeafRead Extra are two separate functions. Just be polite, not necesarily to sharpen your horns, and ask questions before you jump to conclusion, Bully the Goat!

  16. Mike
    September 14, 2007 at 1:19 pm

    DeafRead needs to show the good roles but not.

    If you read DeafRead policy at http://www.deafread.com/guidelines/

    #1 Deaf Related Posts (The entry must pertain to the deaf community and culture. The blogger being deaf or the vlog being in ASL is not enough to qualify. For example, let’s say a blogger decides to do a film review of “Forrest Gump”, it will not be posted because it is not deaf-related. However, if the blogger were to do a review of the availability of captions/subtitles in the “Extra Features” section of the ‘Forrest Gump’ DVD, that would be acceptable. Also, say a blogger initally writes about something deaf-related then goes off on a tangent and remarks about how the movie is rated. This would be fine. In short, it needs to pertain to the deaf community no matter who makes the blog/vlog entry.) I saw many posts that are not deaf-related.

    #3 (If there are ten articles about Marlee Matlin doing the National Anthem at the Super Bowl, we will post only one or two articles. In the Matlin example, there were more than 10 articles from various publications across the country.) I counted the articles regarding Matt Hamill. 21 articles.

    #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. ) Look at Ridorlive!!!! DeafRead let Ridor to attack and offends anyone. He called people many bad names. He offended people about their religion.

    I am always wondering about Deafread since they made many poor judgement and errors. I am glad that Fookembug brought this up.

  17. Lorna
    September 14, 2007 at 1:33 pm

    DeafRead, Tom’s Deaf Advocacy, Ridorlive and Fookem and Bug website are interesting and best website. They are fighting like brothers. We need them for our Deaf Community, don’t we? That would be interesting if all of them meet. Hope they are friends.

  18. White Ghost
    September 14, 2007 at 2:27 pm


    You stated “However, deafread is not being given credit for giving blogs the exposure they enjoy today. I highly doubt many blogs would have reached the popularity levels if not for Deafread. But that is not the purpose.”

    I have to say I disagree with you. It does not make any differences. At this point, for instance, I do really like Seek Geo because of his personality and communication. I do not like Ridor but his well-written have impacted me and others to understand his better and views, especially, he’s a very controversial blogger. It has nothing to do with the popularity issue. However, you denied about this issue.

    So, you decided to move Fookem and Bug and others’ criticism into the Deafread Extra, does not help at all.

    Mike (1:19 PM) is right at this point.

    White Ghost

  19. Shawn R.
    September 14, 2007 at 2:28 pm

    Hey, let’s not criticize each other harshly. We should appreciate that Deaf Read has been invented. If there are any problems or disagreements, we need to should address them with courtesy. We are no better than those people who founded Deaf Read. Think about it.

  20. Janet
    September 14, 2007 at 2:40 pm

    DeafRead doesn’t always respect bloggers & vloggers. They pick their own favorite people.

  21. anon
    September 14, 2007 at 3:28 pm

    I think people are being too hard on DeafRead. To me, the guidelines are clear. However, maybe an editor could do this in deaf grassroots-style ASL as well as the English text. If possible, do both the plagiarism post and the general guidelines in vlogs.

    I’m appreciative of DeafRead, and it’s not an easy task. They have made mistakes and continue to make mistakes. One really glaring one was where they posted a blog by someone who SAID they were hearing in the first sentence, but it had the deaf color (pink), not blue (hearing). Their choice of where blogs go has been off for quite a few weeks. So yes, I agree something needs to be fixed.

    But remember they are a volunteer group. I’m grateful to them. (Even though I hope they can go back to their higher-quality work from months ago.)

    THANK YOU, DeafRead!

  22. Penny
    September 14, 2007 at 4:48 pm

    I always get the impression that Deafread practices favoritism because I know one blogger/vlogger who wrote abstract poems about Deaf culture and other cultures and shared about hearing individuals re; their first impression with Deaf individual yet Deafread refused to accept those articles. I could not figure out their reasons why. I did not feel appropriate to challenge it because it was not my position to do it.

  23. Humble
    September 14, 2007 at 4:54 pm

    Deafread should thank fookembug for bringing this up. I am sure they will fix the mistakes asap. If not for fookembug, maybe it becomes worst in the future? Who knows?

    Deafread Human Editors, do me a favor, try to get unpopular blogger/vlogger in front page because some of their topics are interesting to read.

    Thank you. Peace out

  24. September 14, 2007 at 5:09 pm

    Billythegoat, DeafRead and DeafRead Extra are two different things. When a post does not meet guidelines, it is moved to DeafRead Extra. When one says a post is not published to DeafRead, it means it’s been made available on DeafRead Extra. I hope that clarifies things.

    One thing to keep in mind, when DeafRead first started, we did not have DeafRead Extra. Those posts wasn’t made available on the web at all. After listening to feedback, we decided to add DeafRead Extra so that all posts could be enjoyed one way or other. I believe this was a good decision. DeafRead Extra is frequently visited. It was read 7,048 times in the last 30 days.

    Most importantly, posts in DeafRead Extra can be voted upon. This system allows you to help us notice posts that we may have misjudged or missed.

    I agree with the above suggestion that DeafRead Guidelines should be done in video to reduce misunderstandings. Thanks.

  25. White Ghost
    September 14, 2007 at 5:52 pm


    I have to disagree with you for what you said earlier.

    You stated at 11:38AM, “However, Deafread is not being given credit for giving blogs the exposure they enjoy today. I highly doubt many blogs would have reach the popularity levels if not for deafread. But that is not Deafread’s purpose.”

    Then boom…..you posted recently at 5:09PM, you stated “After listening to feedback, we decided to add Deafread extra so that all posts could be enjoyed one way or other.”

    So then what happened? Are you in a flip-flop?

    plagiarism, copyrights, repeating and others…..are in #$%^&*(*&^%$#@!

    It is scuffling!

    White Ghost

  26. To Humble
    September 14, 2007 at 10:47 pm

    Humble, I see that you still don’t understand the issue that the DeafRead staff tries to point out. It’s nothing to do with whether a blog is interesting or not. The issue has to do with whether a blog is the work of plagiarism or not. How do you feel if a perosn steals your idea, phrase, sentence, etc. without giving credit to you? You’d sue the person for stealing your phrase, idea, etc, right? So, wake up, Humble!

  27. September 15, 2007 at 6:29 am

    I like the concept of DeafRead, but the way it’s managed isn’t very good.

    It is trying to editorialise the blogosphere and in the process a lot of interesting voices don’t get heard. My blog has never been sited on DeafRead cos I don’t follow their publishing guidelines, such as their definiton of what constitutes items of interest to the Deaf community, and I won’t just write about Deaf Stuff. And I too have been critical of them, so probably I’m too hot a potato to touch.

    As for quality. Their judgement isn’t all that crash hot. They allow one of the worse bloggers I know of, MM, who has a reputation in many of the UK groups, forums, and email groups for TROLLING [but they don’t know that].

    DeafRead is fast becoming a boring aggregator because all the topics are the same: ASL, CI, Deaf This, Deaf That..with almost nothing else about what Deaf do, what Deaf are interested in!

  28. September 15, 2007 at 7:24 am

    “Plagiarism” is the wrong word to use to describe Fookem and Bug’s habit of reprinting articles on their blogsite. It would be plagiarism if they removed the authors’ names and substituted their own names and tried to pass it off as their own work. But reprinting articles while acknowledging the source is not plagiarism.

    But that was never the issue. The issue was DeafRead complying with its own guidelines. I never could figure out why they kept posting Fookem and Bug on DeafRead when it was just a reprinted news article; meanwhile I write original postings on topics related to the deaf community, and DeafRead ignores them. Go figure.

  29. rj
    September 15, 2007 at 10:33 am

    Jflmad is right as I noticed it too. I don’t have my gut to speak out like him.

    Like he said, ‘Customers are always right’.


  30. Anonymous
    September 15, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    Some people love the articles. They print them out and put on the wall. The others come and read. Against the law? NO!

    I don’t see anything wrong with FookemBugJflMad website. I think they care about the world and facts. I really admire Bug’s comment. Read –


    It makes a lot of sense.

    Tayler needs to restore respect in society.

  31. Anonymous
    September 15, 2007 at 1:01 pm

    Oh boy! My heart is breaking when I read Tom Willard’s story about his mother. Deafread never posted his story. Tom requested Talyer Mayer to post it as a personal favor. Tayler said “No”. I feel Tom 😦 I agree with him that Deafread needs to change and get improved. To read more. Go to


  32. Penny
    September 15, 2007 at 4:33 pm

    Tayler likes to read articles and view vlogs for himself and if he likes them then he will post it on Deafread. If he does not like it or do not understand blogger’s Ph.D writing style then he will discard and post it on Deafread extra. Google do not decide which to post or not as they are open to public 100%. Funny Google is not being audistic but here? Of course! LOL! 🙂

  33. September 16, 2007 at 10:47 am

    Penny, interesting you would say that. We have published all articles criticizing DeafRead, granted they meet guidelines, including two recent ones by Fookem and Bug. We may not be perfect, and may never will be, but this is a good example of the DeafRead team adhering to guidelines.

  34. Penny
    September 16, 2007 at 12:03 pm

    Tayler- You accepted graphic sex movie and posted on Deafread where little tiny children may have seen this movie on YOUR site and yet you did not accept many clean articles or abstract poem about Deaf and other cultures. What is it then? What kind of guidelines do you have? Something is not right here. Many mentioned this too and you are not being fair to everyone. Think about it and make some changes.

  35. September 16, 2007 at 2:18 pm

    Tayler, once and for all, please explain why you think my recent blog postings do not meet DeafRead guidelines.

    One of my blogs suggested the deaf community offer free sign language classes to the hearing world. Another discussed the need for deaf adult schools since hearing adult schools are not accessible to us.

    How do these blogs not fit in with DeafRead guidelines?

    You also said you “published all articles criticizing DeafRead.” That is blatantly untrue since you did not publish mine. It is also untrue when you tell people my blogs were posted to DeafRead Extra. They weren’t.

  36. September 16, 2007 at 5:52 pm

    Mr. Willard, DeafRead makes every effort to respect its bloggers, vloggers, and readers. However, if a blogger or vlogger continuously treat us with total disrespect through repeated harassment, we may decide to unsubscribe to that blog. This means we stop receiving the RSS feed from that blog. DeafRead editors do not manually check every website out there for obvious time constraint reasons. Now, we were repeatedly harassed by you in emails, including twice recently. As a result, we ended subscription to your blog in March 2007. I don’t know who told you we published them to DeafRead Extra, because we cannot do that if we do not subscribe to your blog.

  37. September 16, 2007 at 5:53 pm

    Penny, there is not a “graphic sex movie” on DeafRead. Search DeafRead’s archives and link to it here please.

    We try to keep DeafRead as clean as possible, while at the same time preserve the first amendment of the Constitution, which is Freedom of Speech. This is a challenging balance to attain. We recently released DeafRead Youth, where the posts should be more age-appropriate for children and teens. The web is a vast place where many things can be found, but with that comes a responsibility: children need to be monitored. DeafRead Youth is our attempt to help curb this problem.


  38. September 16, 2007 at 8:20 pm

    Mr. Tayler …

    You would make a good bureaucrat in a totalitarian government. Any criticism and off with their heads!

    PS .. how about sharing these “harassing” emails so people can judge for themselves?

  39. September 17, 2007 at 9:19 am

    You just did it again.

  40. anonymous
    September 17, 2007 at 11:35 am

    Tayler —

    Tom Willard stated that “how about SHARING these “harassing” emails so that people can judge for themselves?”

    Tom meant to say that he wanted people to read the correspondence between you and him via emails. He also wanted people to judge the conversation between you and him. However, you just denied.

    Read very carefully.

  41. Q.E.
    September 17, 2007 at 12:01 pm

    I’ve known Tayler in the past. I have a story. Contact me if you are interested.

  42. September 17, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    Tayler, you say, “DeafRead makes every effort to respect its bloggers, vloggers, and readers.”

    This whole thing started when I respectfully asked you to post the blog entry about my mom’s passing and you responded with your one-word email saying, “No.”

    That did not show any respect at all.

  43. anonymous
    September 17, 2007 at 1:23 pm


    Tom Willard is right.

    You let several bloggers to post their entries about Doug Bahl. He’s the person you allow to enter the deafread per the guidelines.

    You banned Tom’s about his Mom’s passing. Mom’s the person.

    You did NOT put yourself aside about Tom’s personal. I can SEE that how much you HATE Tom. Therefore, you are NOT the role model.

  44. Billythegoat
    September 17, 2007 at 1:31 pm

    Mary Jane, I like that name, Bullythegoat. Let’s file my horns to make it sharp, babe.

  45. Puzzled
    September 17, 2007 at 2:03 pm

    Tayler, ‘Most importantly, posts in DeafRead Extra can be voted upon. This system allows you to help us notice posts that we may have misjudged or missed.’

    Can you tell me why these topics with high votes are STILL in Deafread Extra? Where is your HumanEditors? They are supposed to check on this. Are they being lazyass? I think Deafread Extra is worthless because they do nothing.

    The lists that are still in Deafread Extra since last week.

    15 votes (The Night the Spider Attacked) by Seek Geo
    14 votes (Heinz Commerical) by DeafJoke.tv
    12 votes (Are You Wearing Heidi’s Beads?) by Deaf Kitchen
    10 votes (PaH – Biggest Deaf Event!) by Seek Geo

  46. September 17, 2007 at 2:21 pm

    I sent Tom an e-mail with an apology precisely three minutes after saying “No”. This was completely disregarded every time, including in the e-mail he e-mailed his readers calling me “cold and heartless”. I still issued a public apology (Apr, 2007) and this was again ignored. The following e-mails the DeafRead team received from Tom were of the disrespectful nature, as he has shown he is capable of in his above comment. He continues to do this, as recent as last August.

  47. Anonymous
    September 17, 2007 at 2:24 pm

    Mary Jane,

    You better watch out for Bullythegoat! His horns are so sharp!

  48. anonymous
    September 17, 2007 at 2:40 pm

    Public Apology is NOT enough! I can see that it is a discrimination! You expect that the deaf community DO know “FAMOUS” and “ONLY” deaf people.

    I DO NOT KNOW DOUG BAHL at all! Even I DO NOT KNOW several v/abloggers as well!

    Your public apology is very disrespectful.

    You need to re-write and apologize to Tom and on the behalf of the deaf community. Go and brush yourself up! Fix the NEW guideline!

    I want to slap your face!

  49. September 17, 2007 at 2:57 pm

    Stories on Bahl were published because it is a deaf-related issue that affects the whole deaf community. It has nothing to do with whether he is “famous” or not.

    This is the same reason this article was published at DeafRead. I don’t know who “Bruce Doss” is, but it was a shock to the deaf community how he was treated which led to his unfortunate death. Doss’ inability to communicate played a role. It had nothing to do with how well-known he was.

  50. anonymous
    September 17, 2007 at 3:05 pm

    It is not enough.

    You published this article into the BEST of Deaf Blogs and Vlogs which is a PART of the deafread. But Tom’s blog on his mom’s passing is NOT!

    Tom Willard is deaf as well. Deaf related only? You MUST respect Tom’s and his Mom’s death.

    I find this very insensitive and inexcusable.

    You did not follow the equal civil rights.

    I am very disappointed in you.

  51. September 17, 2007 at 4:35 pm

    anonymous, I repeat, I paid him my respects by sending him an e-mail with my personal condolences for his mother’s death. This was not mentioned in the widely-distributed e-mail in which he called me “cold and heartless”. That is inexcusable, but did I complain or throw a tantrum? I silently understood that Tom was going through a stressful time, and may have overreacted. I let it slide and will work toward forgiveness for telling, however incorrectly, hundreds of people that I am “cold and heartless”. Not even I am perfect, as “Q.E.” will tell you. I made a mistake by responding too quickly and briefly to a man grieving over his mother’s death, and I publicly apologized for it.

    It has been Tom’s harassing e-mails ever since that confirms removing his blog from DeafRead as a good, but difficult, decision. Since he has had time to regain composure, I cannot find an acceptable excuse for his continued behavior. Cyberbullying must not be tolerated.

  52. anonymous
    September 17, 2007 at 6:22 pm


    “I made a mistake by responding too quickly and briefly to a man grieving over his mother’s death, and I publicly apologized for it.” That is good.

    When you posted the deafread official blog on April 2007, I thought it was very poor entry. It mentioned “Deafread generally does not publish obituaries unless they are for someone well-known in the deaf community.” I thought that the grammar you made is very harsh but insensitive. It’s like just ONLY for the people who serve for the deaf community. For instance, in the past, there were many labels in 1900’s, “For Colored Only” in the water fountains, resturants, buses, bathrooms, etc. That is what I feel about the entry you made in April 2007.

    How could you let Ridorlive to enter “A Glance in the Past”, Sept 05, 2007 in the deafread, it was about John Cassidy who died recently. At this point, I do not know John Cassidy at all.

    I do not care if I do not know Tom Willard’s Mom, however, perhaps, Tom has many friends who have met his Mom before. And also, Tom Willard is deaf.

  53. September 17, 2007 at 6:38 pm

    I have a strong feeling “anonymous” and other commenters in here is the one and only Tom Willard.

    RidorLIVE’s post, “A Glance in the Past“, contained more content than just about Cassidy’s death.

  54. Come on, Tayler
    September 17, 2007 at 6:50 pm

    It is the same as if you read the obituary section in the newspaper although you don’t know who that person is.

    Pay the respect!

    I won’t surprised myself if one of your Deafread Human Editors’ relatives pass away and you post it right away. Even though I don’t know who their relatives are.

    Think about it. OMG Deafread becomes ugly and need to clean up the mess.

    I find it interesting when ‘Puzzled’ left the comment here and you put one topic from Deafread Extra to front page. Why now? You should do it a few days ago?

  55. Nobody, myob
    September 17, 2007 at 8:31 pm

    Geez! Tayler, you sure are slicker than an oil!!

    You really defend yourself with the lame excuses. Also where are the other editors to help you out? I only see you reply all, not the other editors…what’s up with that?

    deaf related contents or not, so what!! most of us post with the deaf related stories. What’s the name of your blog? DEAFread!! figure it out! deaf enough or not, you still should post it on the front page, no matter what.

    You should remove yourself off and let the other run the Deafread. You suck!

  56. September 17, 2007 at 8:39 pm

    No Tayler, the other commenters are not me, but I can’t blame you for your wishful thinking ..

    You continue to say that I “harass” you and “cyberbully” you but you never give any examples.

    I remember my most recent email. I told your editors they were full of crap. Why? Because you kept posting Fookem & Bug’s entries that were nothing more than reprints of news articles. I felt you were hypocritical to not follow your own guidelines.

    I do not recall the previous remarks that got your panties all twisted. That’s why I wish you would share them with us; I am curious.

    I am a New Yorker and I am blunt and say what’s on my mind. You seem to be a delicate flower who can’t take any criticism. You responded to my criticism by banishing me from your site.

    Did it ever occur to you that maybe people want to read what I write and you have no business getting in the way?

    Oops! Was I disrespectful? Hey, respect has to be earned, pal.

  57. September 17, 2007 at 8:54 pm


    I feel it is time I stepped in and said something, particularly after reading all of the comments. I cannot and will not let Tayler take all the brunt of this.

    Some people are in support of DeafRead and how we run it, and some people are in disagreement with how DeafRead is run.

    From the beginning I have told myself and the rest of DeafRead Human Editors team, that we simply cannot please everyone. We do our best, but nobody is perfect.

    I do appreciate feedback and I always encourage others to inform DeafRead.com Editor team what they want, if they have an idea or a suggestion. We are OPEN to listening to all of you and want to do the best we can. You will also need to remember that DeafRead.com doesn’t have a whole lot of funds (barely anything!!) like Yahoo! or Google or other web sites and yet we still try.

    Please also keep in mind we all have full time jobs or going to school and/or have families to take care of. We can’t always be working on DeafRead.com though we put in enough hours to try and keep it sustainable for everyone else.

    I LOVE DEAFREAD.COM and I *especially* LOVE DEAFREADERS! If not for all of you, DeafRead.com wouldn’t be where it is today. Many many thanks to everyone. Yes, EVERYONE!

  58. September 17, 2007 at 9:29 pm

    I love DeafRead, too!

    Before DeafRead, there was DeafWeekly.

    Where did all the readers go?

    Aww, now who needs the roll of toilet paper???

  59. anonymous
    September 18, 2007 at 1:23 am

    Tayler —

    That is me who I post, not Tom’s.


    Please clean up the mess. The deafread official blog on April 2007 needs to change. The grammar that Tayler made, is very poor and inappropriate but very insensitive. Everybody expect that they *MUST* treat us equally in civil rights.

    So, we all must respect human being. At this point, Tom Willard is deaf and Tayler rejected Tom’s blog on Mom’s passing because his Mom was hearing and never served the deaf community.

    Again, clearly, you never know that Tom introduced his deaf and hearing friends to his Mom. You cannot judge his mom because she accepted Tom for who he was for being a deaf. She respected in Tom’s.

    Human editors need to change the guidelines and fix the grammars in the deafread official blog in April 2007.

  60. September 18, 2007 at 5:22 am

    Deaf258 …

    Deafweekly — http://www.deafweekly.com — will begin its fourth year of publication in October and will soon surpass the 7,000-subscriber mark.

    What are you talking about?

  61. mother goose
    September 18, 2007 at 8:40 am

    We need to focus on being positive. Thanks to deafread for all the hard work, too.

    My heart goes to Tom about his mom. Maybe Taylor can encourange him to change something and give some ideas for Tom to add in his blog…then he can accept to post Tom’s blog about his mom.

    (I don’t read all of their comments here, just some)

    (I don’t read all of the comments here)

  62. Mike
    September 18, 2007 at 5:21 pm

    mother goose,

    Change what? We don’t let Dopehead change and control the people. Wake up & smell the coffee.

  63. mother goose
    September 18, 2007 at 7:44 pm

    Honestly, I don’t want to take anyone’s side. Too much negative going on here. It’s my last comment. I hope that Tayler will clean the mess and if Tom has a chance to have his blog added in the deafread. I look foward to reading his blog when I see his name.
    Good luck!

  64. roy coyle
    September 19, 2007 at 7:33 am

    i just dont read the crap…just skip over…
    what can the deaf do without interpreters? plenty but nobody want to talk about that-

  65. nobody
    September 20, 2007 at 5:57 pm

    Puzzled, your words worked because deafread posted the topics from extra to front page.

  66. PP
    October 12, 2007 at 10:44 am

    We can help Deafread by reminding them on a regular basis when they fail to follow guidelines. They are busy and may need our help. We can let them know when a blog or a vlog fails to follow guidelines. Not all blogs and vlogs are clean. We all know it.

  1. September 14, 2007 at 9:08 pm
Comments are closed.