[nagdu] RavenTolliver

Sat Sep 5 12:57:43 UTC 2015

Raven,

	I would have sent this message to you off-list; however, your email address is not visible in the headers. I am not going to argue these points with you. I am simply going to state that dissenting opinions are welcome, provided  they are stated with dignity and respect. What is not welcome is discension. Subscription to NFBNET lists are a privilege that carries with it concomitant responsibilities. If you do not begin to abide by the rules of this list and the admonitions of our moderators, your subscription will be terminated.

Fraternally yours,
Marion Gwizdala
-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Raven Tolliver via nagdu
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 7:18 PM
To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Cc: Raven Tolliver
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Are Training Program Policies Discriminatory? was Talking points for convos with training centers' directors

“[M]any people are critical of our positions and have preconceived notions about our structure but are not involved in the organization and, as such, their criticism is empty.”

Marion, this argument doesn’t hold up. Being free of membership in your organization does not make anyone’s argument more or less logical, or give anyone’s argument more or less merit. Just as easily, I could assert that because you are an NFB member, you are unable to view your position objectively. But that would be rather silly for me to assert since there are NFB members who openly disagree with parts of the NFB’s philosophy.
If I applied what you said to other organizations, it would be outrageous. For some examples, “Many people are critical of the Catholic religion’s positions and have preconceived notions about their structure but are not involved in the organization and, as such, their criticism is empty.”
“Many people are critical of the Ku Klux Klan’s positions and have preconceived notions about their structure but are not involved in the organization and, as such, their criticism is empty.”
“Many people are critical of the American Medical Association’s positions and have preconceived notions about their structure but are not involved in the organization and, as such, their criticism is empty.”
“Many people are critical of the Department of Justice’s positions and have preconceived notions about their structure but are not involved in the organization and, as such, their criticism is empty.”
“Many people are critical of Nazi Germany’s positions and have preconceived notions about their structure but were not involved in the organization and, as such, their criticism is empty.”
Such an assertion render all third party validation and objection illogical or meritless. So because I’m an outsider, I have no room to talk?
This assertion is used by many, claiming they don’t even need to defend or provide reasoning for their beliefs or practices because they have more experience and supposed education, so what could those with fewer years of experience and less education possibly know? I have talked to veterinarians, medical doctors, and teachers who rely on this faulty defense strategy. This claim is a sign of disrespect, disdain, and derision because it makes several unsupported assumptions.
More experience means more, more accurate, and more sensible knowledge.
People with more experience are always worth listening to.
Les experience means less, less accurate, and less sensible knowledge.
People with less experience are never worth listening to.
Insiders are correct.
Only insiders have all the facts.
Outsiders are ill-informed.
Outsiders have inaccurate information.
Essentially, outsiders have inferior and meritless opinions, and only insiders have superior and the most accurate opinions.
It appears that the superiority complex within the NFB extends far beyond cane users vs. guide dog travelers.

Here’s you again:
“[M]ost on this list are not members. They take advantage of our assets without any investment in the organization. They are more than happy to talk about their rights but refuse to exercise responsibility. There are not rights without concomitant responsibilities.”
If you find issue with people “taking advantage” of the benefits the organization offers without investing in the organization, then charge them or set up an ultimatum. Charge them fees or request equal services for all or any offered assistance. That is what many people do when they would like something in return for the services they provide. They either ask for money, or request the party they’re helping to return the favor with a service relatively equal in value.
If you feel that you as an NFB member or the whole NFB organization is owed something or being taken advantage of, then make such an agreement with the nonmembers you serve.
Also, not participating in or not paying the NFB says nothing of a person’s level of responsibility or appreciation for their rights. The NFB is not the only avenue for advocating for, defending, and educating the public about one’s rights as a blind person. The people who use free services offered by the NFB owe the NFB nothing and are not obligated to return any favors. Perhaps some of them feel that they must return the favor, and that is great. But to look down on nonmembers who benefit from the NFB’s programs and services is to essentially call those people inferior, lazy, and ungrateful.
Undermining people and inviting them to join your organization
screams: “You’re a more educated, more accurate, more responsible blind person if you join us.” Because as you’ve already explained, nonmembers’ arguments rely on misinformation, so they do not hold logic or merit.
I don’t know how you arrived at that conclusion, but it doesn’t make sense.
--
Raven
Founder of 1AM Editing & Research
www.1am-editing.com

You are valuable because of your potential, not because of what you have or what you do.

Naturally-reared guide dogs
https://groups.google.com/d/forum/nrguidedogs

On 9/4/15, Marion Gwizdala via nagdu <nagdu at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> Marianne,
>
> 	Since membership in an affiliate division constitutes membership in 
> NAGD and you are a member of the Ohio Association of Guide dog users, 
> you are a member of NAGDU. My point in the message I sent was not that 
> one must be a member of NAGDU to participate in our programs; rather, 
> it was to make the point that many people are critical of our 
> positions and have preconceived notions about our structure but are 
> not involved in the organization and, as such, their criticism is 
> empty. Membership has its priveleges, as American Express asserts. The 
> privilege of membership in NAGDU is to speak on the floor, vote, and 
> hold office. We give anyone wishing to have their voice heard the 
> opportunity to do so on this list; however, most on this list are not 
> members. They take advantage of our assets without any investment in 
> the organization. They are more than happy to talk about their rights 
> but refuse to exercise responsibility. There are not rights without concomitant responsibilities.
>
> Fraternally yours,
> Marion Gwizdala

_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blind411%40verizon.net