Monday, 30 September 2019

1984 or 2019?

Image result for biased moderationHow the UK deaf approach the right way to debate things, would YOU join via these rules? And they wonder why Brexit and the EU issue still isn't addressed.  The site which ATR WON'T put a link to, claims to be the UK sole real news and feedback deaf site in the UK (And the tablets are working just fine thanks).  This actually IS from a real UK deaf site.

Getting in touch:

Private messages to moderators regarding muting, being blocked or removal of comments/posts will be ignored.

[Basically, you cannot complain if they edit your posts or reject via OWN own personal opinion or you are banned].

If you have any further questions or concerns about moderation, feel free to ask in a post, we usually are happy to discuss it publicly even if we can't reach an agreement - be prepared to back up any concerns though.

[Collectively they will use the site and their supporters to discredit you if you oppose or contradict them]

BUT bear in mind that persistent bad faith complaints about moderation or moderators may result in moderation action being taken against you. We are doing this in a voluntary capacity.

[So if you do not like what we say or do that is bad faith, and you are out too].

If you do need to contact the moderators about anything, be descriptive and state what the issue is clearly. Please allow moderators sufficient time to respond - we have a life to live, it is not a 24/7 chat support. If we aren't lucky enough to be on your friends list, we may not even notice you have messaged us for some time. That's Facebook for you, not us.

The report function is not a guarantee that something will be done - moderators may decide no further action is required after reviewing a user submitted report.

[We reserve the right to ignore you anyway].

Comments or submissions which call for/incite violence or threaten direct-action against political figures, journalists, members and media personalities in a way that constitutes illegal harassment or intimidation may result in a permanent ban and may be reported to the authorities.

Moderators do post their own personal views and partake in all debates freely within the rules of the group, the same as any other members.

[And if you disagree then again we retain the right to get rid of you, we don't do 'neutral'].

Robust debate is encouraged, angry arguments are not. This group is for people with a wide variety of views, and as such you will come across content, views and people you don't agree with. Political views from a wide spectrum are tolerated here.

[We refer you back to the Moderator right if we don't agree you are out]. 

Persistent engagement in bad faith or antagonistic, uncivil or abusive behaviour will result in action being taken against your comments/post or even membership.

Comments and submissions that contribute nothing more than personal insults or group based attacks will be removed. Persistent harassment targeted at other members will result in moderation action being taken including a permaban.

Gaslighting or straw man argument or ad hominem arguments etc aren't helpful or constructive. Don't do it. 

[Don't ask us what 'Ad hominem' is, it's just another way of blocking you if we don't understand.]

Anything not specifically concerning politics in the UK/EU or geopolitics involving the UK/EU will not be approved. In the rare instances we may let in international news that is of sufficient interest. If you want to do that, explain in the post why you're posting it. 

Posts should be used as an invitation to discussion, not an opportunity to soapbox, tub-thump or showboat.

[Only what we view is admissable will be, it's our site and don't you forget it.]

If you see racist, homophobic etc comments please report them. Taking issue with immigration or refugee policy is not automatically racist. This does not open the door to make it about any specific group of people based on their nationality, belief, colour of skin etc. 

[So you cannot be racist but you can/will be viewed that if you mention race, immigrant or colour etc.]

News articles older than one week will usually be rejected. If an older article has relevance to events being discussed today, you should outline this argument in the same post that links to said article. On days where events move particularly fast, moderators may rejected outdated news regardless of age. We also may reject posts if we're aware the same article already exist in the group.

[However that rule applies to MEMBERS, it does not apply to the moderators, who can reproduce articles from 1998 if they want to.]

Long-form journalism published more than twelve months prior or before significant developments to the topic it discusses should be submitted as part of a self-post detailing why it is relevant today. Articles from paywalled sites should be linked to directly, and a copy/paste, screenshot or outline.com link provided in the comments. Full credit to the author and publication should be given. Some websites may have different conditions applied due to copyright issues or differences in the design of their paywall.

POSTING TWITTER OR FACEBOOK LINKS.

They are acceptable, so long as they are from journalists, pollsters, politicians and so forth. Tweets from random members of the public are not, but maybe approved depending on context and notability.

[Moderator social links CAN be included].

Facebook posts/Twitter tweets which do not contribute substance or contain reactionary commentary regardless of author will generally be removed as "hot takes"

Twitter threads should be submitted as a link submission identifying the Twitter thread in the title where possible. The contents of a thread should be posted as a text comment or link to an appropriate Thread Reader url.

Facebook posts/Twitter tweets that are just a link to an article and contain no commentary of substance will be removed. Said articles should submitted in place of the tweet with the accompanying tweet linked to in the comments.
Other social media sources or accounts that don't fit the criteria will continue to be reviewed manually.

Submitting your own content is perfectly fine, but make it clear that it's your own content and meet the rules of group.

[Again we refer you back to Moderator rulings on what is viable posting, and that means you have to satisfy all of them, and any single moderator can still block].

All images with any form of claims that have no sources to back it up (valid links) in it will be rejected. No exceptions (See Fake News below).

FAKE NEWS.

Fake news is heavily frowned on and is a danger to a healthy functioning democracy. We will automatically reject all links from all known fake news sites such as Breitbart, Infowars, Westmonster etc. The moderation team will always try to recognise and remove fake news. We may not always get it right, please report any that we have gotten wrong.

[What IS fake news depends on what the moderators think is or isn't since all media posts can be viewed biased or fake anyway. Quoting as the moderators do from various media sources is OK but they retain the right to block you doing it, if the media you quoted challenges their view.]

It is helpful to follow guides on recognising fake news (hint: news that you don't agree with isn't "fake news"), here are some to get you started:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/dec/18/what-is-fake-news-pizzagate
https://www.facebook.com/help/188118808357379
https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/fake-news.

FINALLY.

These rules are not exhaustive, moderators reserve the right to moderate (or not) where it is felt to be appropriate. Past moderation decisions are no guarantee of future mod decisions. Rules are subject to change without notice.
Basically...don't be an arsehole :)
Donald John Trump is strictly forbidden from joining. ;)

Thank you for reading. Please enjoy this group.  As always ensure your medication is up to date, and get your carers/parents permission first.

Having deaf babies can be ethically right.



He wrote 'War of the World's' as well didn't he! And he wrote without current knowledge of choices, DNA, and genetics.

H.G. Wells, with his acute sense of ethical dilemmas in science, wrote a short story in 1904 about disability, “The Country of the Blind”. In it, an explorer discovers a remote valley in the Andes where everyone is blind. 


Thinking himself superior, he tries to teach the villagers about sight, but they scoff at him. What’s more, in many respects he is inferior. Eventually, to be allowed to marry the girl he loves, he agrees to have his eyes plucked out. But his courage fails him at the last minute and he flees. While blindness does not have defenders as a normal way of life, deafness does. 

There is a growing body of literature to support the right of deaf parents to use pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to select for deaf children. Jacqueline Mae Wallis, a philosopher at the University of Bristol (UK), contends in the journal Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy that this is morally permissible. “Selection for deafness, with deafness understood as mere-difference and valued for its cultural identity, need not necessitate impermissible moral harms,” she writes. For most people this sounds implausible, but she counters the most common objections handily. 

Will the child be harmed? Not necessarily. It might even be good for a child to be deaf. They will be able to learn a signed language; they will be more sensitive to “enhanced visual and vibrational qualia experiences”. Will it restrict future life plans? Not necessarily. “Deaf advocates can reply that being deaf opens future life plans that being hearing cannot, and that families who seek to choose deafness for their child do not view this as a limitation.” In fact, a hearing child born to deaf parents might find life more difficult. Will it introduce harm into the world? Not necessarily. 

“Every reproductive decision will plausibly introduce some harm into the world,” Wallis writes. “Every child’s life will include some limited opportunities and suffering, determined by climate, politics, socioeconomic status, biology, etc Much of the author’s argument flows from the insights of disability theorist Elizabeth Barnes. She argues that disability is merely difference: “having a disability makes you physically non-standard, but it doesn’t (by itself or automatically) make you worse off.” And as Wallis points out, “Contrary to what the bad-difference view suggests about their disabilities, most people with disabilities do not describe themselves as suboptimal, deficient, dysfunctional, etc. but rather as healthy, whole, functional, etc.” 

Therefore, she concludes in this provocative article, “some families may have good, morally-grounded reasons for selecting genetic deafness for a future child.” H.G. Wells would have approved. 

The doctor who's blind and deaf:


Alexandra (pictured right) with her fellow medical students at Cardiff University
Medical student, 25, uses a special Bluetooth stethoscope (and patients love her folding cane) Alexandra Adams, 25, is training to be a doctor despite being deaf and blind.


The fourth-year student was previously pegged to be a paralympic swimmer Miss Adams makes use of a specially made stethoscope to examine her patients. On her first day working on the ward, a doctor asked Alexandra Adams why she was walking around with a patient's cane. After explaining it was actually hers, the deaf and blind medical student was told not to touch any patients – then sent home. 

Now in her fourth year at university, Miss Adams, 25, has refused to let her disabilities hold her back from becoming a doctor. 'It has always been that if someone told me I couldn't do something, I would go out of my way to prove I could,' she said. 'I can do cannulation, take blood, catheterise [and] spot rashes.' Born deaf in both ears, and with vision of less than 5 per cent in her left eye and none in her right.   Alexandra is now in her fourth year of study on her way to becoming a fully qualified doctor.

She relies on touch to feel for veins, adding: 'You can pick up a lot about patients just by listening to them. Patient safety is paramount so if I'm doubting something, or I'm unsure, I always ask someone.' Miss Adams had been due to represent GB as a swimmer at the 2012 Paralympics but was hospitalised aged 16 with acid reflux. She told The Sunday Times that stomach surgery went 'very wrong', forcing her to have more than 20 operations and stay in the hospital for 18 months. 

The experience saw her switch her focus from swimming to medicine – and she duly enrolled to study the subject at Cardiff University. She says being a patient taught her the value of empathy. 'I've been able to go up to patients who've been terrified, and I just draw the curtains and say, 'I know how you feel'.

BSL Word Games.


It's interesting for a number of issues, it helps deaf people to read English better and further their English language word knowledge whilst raising awareness of sign that doesn't.