I'm more surprised that people know we exist.
And who considers us sick for our stance on the "cure" issue?
Curebies, who else? 
Actually, a lot of people who don't know very much about the issue will get upset if you just say, "AFF is against a cure". If you do not explain it, they believe (because they do not realize they have been duped) that we want to deny these poor miserable children the ability to have happy lives. So of course it seems sick, they don't understand it. But I have met people who are really open to the idea, AFTER you explain to them about how autistics are stigmatized, and what autism REALLY is, and why we don't want cures.
Also, I agree with the woman in the OP's post, we are very disorganized. I think the very existence of the forum is useful, though, even if not much actual campaigning gets done. And if people at an AFF meeting did have a fight, well, that says more about them as people than it does about AFF, I think.
Kinda difficult when we're all over the earth.
Haven't heard of this fight either.
I have this fantasy about a site made to be run like an organization, maybe doable.
People here don't like organization and order, that's why they don't like my ideas.
Some people seem to think it is a pro-life movement -- that AFF is totally against abortions of autistic babies --- and that it is only a bunch of people with Asperger's who "don't understand how horrible LFA is".
IMO there are some folks crusading on other sites in our name who have these very emotional statements and don't follow the ettiquette that the more serious neurodiversity advocates have learnt, and that way give a bad impression on the rest of us.
Should make a nice introduction for that ettiquette, here's a start:
- Don't bash specific or groups of parents for what they believe is the best for their children, while you may point out inadequasies in the misinformation they are often given.
Personally I think the opinions expressed on AFF are more often presentable than those found on WP.
Re: Robert's Rules of Order... In my subculture, I can tell you of a comparison of two sci-fi groups I've been involved with. One uses some tight set of rules, probably Robert's, and is dysfunctional as hell. All the invested egos and everybody's desire for control might have something to do with it. I just recently got out of it and informed my chapter's president that I won't be renewing.
The other sci-fi group I know keeps the rules minimal and simple, and has few if any problems. They organize an annual convention with an attendance of about 1,000. That's no small feat. This year will be its 27th. I've never seen any troublemakers in that group, but I've been told that's because they are quietly shown to the exit. They did say somebody came along and tried to Roberts them up, and only got laughed at.
Re: how AFF is viewed in general... So they say we can't even organize a dinner party? Hey, if the first of the two groups I mentioned above can do it, anyone can. Kind of hard to organize anything when you're spread thinly throughout the world and have to operate on limited social skills, don't ya think? Difficult, but not impossible. Just start small and concentrate on informally meeting the members in your local area.
Nice Bunker you got there.
If I was to list neurodiversity-related online groups in order of who I find are the most representable when thinking of quality over quantity I would put it like this:
4th - Wrongplanet
3rd - Aspies for Freedom
2nd - Autism Hub
1st - Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN)
Ari Ne'eman's (who's autistic) statements through ASAN's mailing list tend to be really fab and well-balanced, I believe you have to ask for permission though if you want to copy and paste them on a website or anything.
There are also blogs on Autism Hub that are very representable, like the one of Amanda Baggs and Kristina Chew.
I have heard bad things about this site. Someone has also said this is an awful place. My guess is people have had bad experience on this site with the mods or the owners or with other members, so they think this whole forum is bad. I have seen the bad talk about Amy and Gareth. I don't remember the details of course. Only thing I can remember is one of my online friends joined this site, he was in the chat room, he posted the link and the mods told him he was spamming. He never went back to this site again.
Why is that his problem? Posting one link isn't spamming; it looks like a bad mod call to me.
Why is that his problem? Posting one link isn't spamming; it looks like a bad mod call to me.
I suspect there's more to the story than the friend has told.
How many times did you post it? What kind of site were you posting to?
Of course, I've never once gone to the chat room, so I don't really know how things work there.
You really won't want to hear it.
I only know two people who have heard of AFF. One who read the site concluded that AFF was mostly a bunch of whiners and buttholes who are narrow minded, argumentative, self focused, dysfunctional crybabies who expect the world should change just to accomodate them because they are so special/fragile/superior/whatever. It was also felt that AFF seemed to suffer grandiose dilusions. Upon reading a thread that was 2 pages on topic and then turned into 10 pages of unrelated brawl, the reader sputtered: "They think they can organize a world movement? They couldn't even organize a dinner party!".
So um...
Funny...that's what I've heard about WP and Zomg. Zomg is quite "out there" and a lot of the time, the people don't take themselves very seriously.