What is the alexander graham bell company?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chase said:
The names Bell and Einstein are synonymous with twentieth century advances, beneficial to us all. Still, in my opinion, their ideas produced two monsters which got out of hand and may yet destroy us all: The telephone and the atom bomb.
Click to expand...

Actually, he didn't invent the telephone.
 
I guess its all a matter of perspective. For many of us who were involved in the ci community of the 80s and early 90s, AGBell was viewed as an organization that did little or next to nothing for implant users and their families. They stood on the sidelines when national healthcare was being proposed in the early 90s and they did absolutely nothing about the misprepresentations and hateful anti-ci for children agendas of organizations such as N(B)AD.

It was organizations such as CICI, SSSH and AVT that stood up to organizations such as N(B)AD and which ultimately led these organizations to change their anti-ci for children propaganda and positions.

The irony is that today, those organizations have either dissolved or grown smaller, while AGBell benefited from all their hard work and efforts to combat the anti-ci agenda and propaganda.
Rick
 
Banjo said:
Actually, he didn't invent the telephone.
Click to expand...

I know; it was Don Ameche.

That bit of movie mania aside, it's true Bell's patent was based on many, many ideas, some a thousand years old and some racing concurrently with his own experiements, so I avoided "invent," as it does impy "originate."

Radical as his ideas were, even Einstein's math was based on Aristotle's and Galileo's and many others' contributions.

Good post. It's always good to clarify.
 
rick48 said:
I guess its all a matter of perspective. For many of us who were involved in the ci community of the 80s and early 90s, AGBell was viewed as an organization that did little or next to nothing for implant users and their families. They stood on the sidelines when national healthcare was being proposed in the early 90s and they did absolutely nothing about the misprepresentations and hateful anti-ci for children agendas of organizations such as N(B)AD.

It was organizations such as CICI, SSSH and AVT that stood up to organizations such as N(B)AD and which ultimately led these organizations to change their anti-ci for children propaganda and positions.

The irony is that today, those organizations have either dissolved or grown smaller, while AGBell benefited from all their hard work and efforts to combat the anti-ci agenda and propaganda.
Rick
Click to expand...

The "B" has no place in the NAD acronym. If we are going to stick to accuracy, let's not make up acronyms that don't exist.

Likewise, you might do well to keep in mind that A.G. Bad stands for the A.G. Bell Associaion for the deaf. The "for in the title conveys a paternalistic attitude toward that pervades the philosophies of the organization. The implied statement is that the hearing must make decision for the Deaf/deaf, as they are incapable of making decisions themselves regarding communication choices and lifestyle.

The NAD, however, is the National Association of the Deaf. The "of" in the title indicates that the NAD represents the deaf/Deaf community based on what the deaf/Deaf community defines as their needs, and is represented in thier philiosophical orientation regarding issues affecting the deaf/Deaf population.

The question is not whether A.G.Bad has benefited, but whether the deaf/Deaf population has benefitted from their practices. The answer can be found in the fact that the hearing tend to support the organization, while the deaf/Deaf do not.
 
rick48 said:
I guess its all a matter of perspective. For many of us who were involved in the ci community of the 80s and early 90s, AGBell was viewed as an organization that did little or next to nothing for implant users and their families. They stood on the sidelines when national healthcare was being proposed in the early 90s and they did absolutely nothing about the misprepresentations and hateful anti-ci for children agendas of organizations such as N(B)AD.

It was organizations such as CICI, SSSH and AVT that stood up to organizations such as N(B)AD and which ultimately led these organizations to change their anti-ci for children propaganda and positions.

The irony is that today, those organizations have either dissolved or grown smaller, while AGBell benefited from all their hard work and efforts to combat the anti-ci agenda and propaganda.
Rick
Click to expand...

NBAD? Where is the joke?

AGBAD..there is a joke cuz B stands for Bell A stands for Association and D stands for Deaf so it is just such a great joke in the Deaf community. Pretty creative, huh?

So what does the B in N(B)AD stand for? :whistle:
 
Jillio
"The "B" has no place in the NAD acronym. If we are going to stick to accuracy, let's not make up acronyms that don't exist."

Rick,

My point exactly. Since AGBell does not present itself to the public by the use of an acronym, my use of N(B)AD is being used to show just how juvenile you and others are by referring to it as such.

Jillio,
"Likewise, you might do well to keep in mind that A.G. Bad stands for the A.G. Bell Associaion for the deaf."

Rick
No, actually "f we are going to stick to accuracy", it does not as if you still want to resort to juvenile tactics then the correct acronym should be AGBAFTD.

Jillio,
"The "for in the title conveys a paternalistic attitude toward that pervades the philosophies of the organization. The implied statement is that the hearing must make decision for the Deaf/deaf, as they are incapable of making decisions themselves regarding communication choices and lifestyle.

The NAD, however, is the National Association of the Deaf. The "of" in the title indicates that the NAD represents the deaf/Deaf community based on what the deaf/Deaf community defines as their needs, and is represented in thier philiosophical orientation regarding issues affecting the deaf/Deaf population."

Please spare us the spin, do you really waste time making this stuff up? Some might argue that the use of the preposition "for" conveys an attitude of support and assistance for those who chose it from them. However, the majority, myself included, do not think that an organization is defined by a preposition in its title.

Jillio,
"The question is not whether A.G.Bad has benefited, but whether the deaf/Deaf population has benefitted from their practices. The answer can be found in the fact that the hearing tend to support the organization, while the deaf/Deaf do not."

Rick,

Since both deaf, Deaf and hearing belong to both organizations the answer will not be found that way. However, the answer you seek has nothing to do with the point I made and thus, is pointless.
 
rick48 said:
Jillio
"The "B" has no place in the NAD acronym. If we are going to stick to accuracy, let's not make up acronyms that don't exist."

Rick,

My point exactly. Since AGBell does not present itself to the public by the use of an acronym, my use of N(B)AD is being used to show just how juvenile you and others are by referring to it as such.
Jillio,
"Likewise, you might do well to keep in mind that A.G. Bad stands for the A.G. Bell Associaion for the deaf."

Rick
No, actually "f we are going to stick to accuracy", it does not as if you still want to resort to juvenile tactics then the correct acronym should be AGBAFTD.

Jillio,
"The "for in the title conveys a paternalistic attitude toward that pervades the philosophies of the organization. The implied statement is that the hearing must make decision for the Deaf/deaf, as they are incapable of making decisions themselves regarding communication choices and lifestyle.

The NAD, however, is the National Association of the Deaf. The "of" in the title indicates that the NAD represents the deaf/Deaf community based on what the deaf/Deaf community defines as their needs, and is represented in thier philiosophical orientation regarding issues affecting the deaf/Deaf population."

Please spare us the spin, do you really waste time making this stuff up? Some might argue that the use of the preposition "for" conveys an attitude of support and assistance for those who chose it from them. However, the majority, myself included, do not think that an organization is defined by a preposition in its title.

Jillio,
"The question is not whether A.G.Bad has benefited, but whether the deaf/Deaf population has benefitted from their practices. The answer can be found in the fact that the hearing tend to support the organization, while the deaf/Deaf do not."

Rick,

Since both deaf, Deaf and hearing belong to both organizations the answer will not be found that way. However, the answer you seek has nothing to do with the point I made and thus, is pointless.
Click to expand...



By having a insider joke within the Deaf community, we are junevile? People poke fun at everything...which why we have Jay Leno, David Letterman, and the Daily Show? Guess the Deaf community dont have the same rights as hearing people to poke fun at organizations...:ugh:
 
AGBAD is a joke because that's the real acronym. Like I said earlier, people appropriate it for their own use.

Making up N(B)AD is just silly. It doesn't mean anything, it isn't a real organization, it's pointless.
 
Actually the full name is
logo.gif


So I guess it is AGBADHH
 
The NAD, however, is the National Association of the Deaf. The "of" in the title indicates that the NAD represents the deaf/Deaf community based on what the deaf/Deaf community defines as their needs, and is represented in thier philiosophical orientation regarding issues affecting the deaf/Deaf population.
Click to expand...
Yes, indeedy. One time I spoke at a conference that was mostly for "hearing impaired" kids (ie oral deaf and oral hoh kids) and despite the fact that there weren't too many Signers, NAD still had a booth there! Looks like its not as closed minded as you think!
 
Thank you all for your replies. You saved me the trouble of reiterating what I had already stated. I would only like to add that it is not my spin at all, but the terminology chosen and used by each organization ("for" and "of") that represents the philosophical orientation of the organization.

Likewise, NAD seeks to serve the needs of all deaf as perceived by the deaf, while A.G. Bad seeks to serve the needs of the oral deaf only as those needs are perceived by the hearing.
 
deafbajagal said:
Here's the link to NAD's position statement on CIs.

I must have missed something because I don't see where it says NAD is an anti-ci organization. *shrugging*
Position Statement - National Association of the Deaf
Click to expand...

He's going to come back and say "they're not anymore but they used to be" - I am guessing this based on this quote:
rick48 said:
It was organizations such as CICI, SSSH and AVT that stood up to organizations such as N(B)AD and which ultimately led these organizations to change their anti-ci for children propaganda and positions.
Click to expand...
 
Etoile said:
He's going to come back and say "they're not anymore but they used to be" - I am guessing this based on this quote:
Click to expand...

You are most likely correct, but one only needs check the position historically.

This is again where the differences in philosohpical orientation come in. A.G. Bad's focal point in regard to deaf children is the need of the hearing parent, while the NAD's focal point is the needs and well being of the deaf child.
 
deafbajagal said:
Here's the link to NAD's position statement on CIs.

I must have missed something because I don't see where it says NAD is an anti-ci organization. *shrugging*
Position Statement - National Association of the Deaf
Click to expand...

That's the one they were forced to adopt, when even their President, who was saying it was wrong for parents to give their children the benefits of a ci, got an implant for herself. (I think her name was Nancy Blockhead or something like that.) Go back and read their original anti-ci position paper, the one written by their former spokespman--a childless hearing man. BTW, I have it, because like your father, I too, always read the enemy's propaganda.
 
Etoile said:
He's going to come back and say "they're not anymore but they used to be" - I am guessing this based on this quote:
Click to expand...

Looks like from the above post, you hit the nail on the head!:giggle:
 
jillio said:
Yes. I have posted that position statement in the past when certain posters made the unfounded accusation of the NAD being anti-CI.
Click to expand...

Would you like to see a copy of the poster N(B)AD offered for sale to its members of a young girl with her head split open exposing her ci and a tear rolling down her cheek. Or perhaps you would like to see the video tape of Nancy Blockhead telling a parent of a ci child on national television that it was wrong for the parents to have implanted their child and on that same tape where she produced an outdated cochlear implant and tried to pass it off as the current model? That was of course, before she gave herself the benefits of the cochlear implant she sought to deny to others. I have facts to back up my position, you do not when you state that N(B)AD was not anti-ci.

I guess in your book absolutely nothing would ever qualify someone or some organization as being anti-ci.
 
Etoile said:
He's going to come back and say "they're not anymore but they used to be" - I am guessing this based on this quote:
Click to expand...

You are only half right, I have no idea what N(B)AD presently is but I do know that they spewed hate and were anti-ci. My guess is when they saw they way the deaf population was embracing the ci, their core values became secondary to their survival as an organization. Got to love their institutional integrity, ...not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top