[gui-talk] NFB on accessible money

Wed Dec 6 17:35:11 CST 2006

Steve,

Sorry to have ruffled your feathers.  I respect the work you do on behalf of the NFB, and I understand that you believe each effort is made on behalf of everyone blind in the United States.  Please permit me simply to think differently, from issue to issue.  As far as those damn chirping traffic lights go , I think you must be totally forgetting the millions of people whose vision is seriously impaired in ways that may be hard for you to imagine without thinking of them as simply "blind," which isn't correct.  If you don't understand this, I just don't know what to tell you. Age related Macular Degeneration?  Glaucoma?  RP?  Some, like RP people (including myself) have to make it part of their life to commit to learning new skills of adaptation in all sorts of ways as they head down a slow road toward what the sighted world considers literal blindness, which is about what you'd think of as light perception or less.

but the rest don't even need a cane to walk down the street, unless maybe to warn others not to walk into them because, say, their central retinal function is zapped.  Do you understand what that means, physiologically and optically?  I sometimes wonder.  And those people may never think of getting O and M training, let alone learning all the blind martial arts-level skills of judging the air pressure at an intersection or all those other techniques. They just wanna know if the light's green or red!  What's so damn awful about that?  And these are more people Steve, than you think.  Many more.  You've just got to understand you're working within a comparatively small demographic and demanding that everyone with what sighted people would consider meaningfully low vision but not "blindness," fall into step with your paradigm.  It isn't that simple, is all I'm almost ever trying to suggest to you at times like this.  And please, do email me the first time someone falls onto the F Train tracks on their way home to Brooklyn because of blind edge stripping.  That stuff is hard to believe.

I don't know.  You are offended by the Jonestown allusion?  I don't blame you.  But of course no one is saying such things about anyone else in the blind community, or about the other organizations.  It's just the way the NFB's  rigid vision is perceived.  By a lot of people, Steve. Not all ACB people who feel themselves in organizational competition with you.  Why do you think that?

I grow weary.  Look, sorry you're offended.  But some NFB honcho in Northern California gave me my first unfortunate look at this forbidding world of ultra Orthodox blindness, and as I slide further along toward functional blindness, it scares me more and more to think of that culture.  And these rationales just exacerbate my mistrust and apprehension.  It's all personal, Steve.  I'm no politician.  I'm not involved in some hassle between you and the ACB or Diebold or some Ohio congressman.  I don't care about that stuff very much.  It's the culture, and its seems frighteningly parochial to me.

I'm just being honest.  And with all due respect.  And so forth. Honestly.

From: Steve Jacobson 
To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List 
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money

Joel and others,

I agree that we need to wind this down on this list, but at the same time I am sorry that you feel as you do.  The fact is that there are two strongly-held valid 
viewpoints on several of these subjects.  Given today's tendency toward political correctness, do you truly think most of the public is going to voice the opinion that 
we should not have whatever we ask for?  

While I can see there is no point in arguing the issues, I do feel there is a point to make the case that both viewpoints are valid and not counterintuitive or any of the 
other rather insulting characterizations that were in your note.  I've been involved here in Minnesota with the approval and establishment of voting machines, and 
there is a definite backlash in some areas.  That doesn't make it wrong, but it illustrates that there are prices to pay.  I also have seen some of our web accessibility 
efforts with which you probably agree cause employers to feel that their internal web sites might not be accessible, an issue that would not come to light unless blind 
employees are hired.  In that case, one has to balance the benefit to blind people overall against the negatives of possible reactions of specific employers.  It used to 
be almost standard practice in the 1970's for agencies for the blind to purchase equipment necessary for a blind person to do a given job.  Now, the employer is 
expected to buy it.  In many jobs, it will cost employers more to hire a blind employee for the same position and this is not some counter-intuitive theory but fact.  It 
puts us at a disadvantage, and people need to recognize that.

I have personally had to negotiate with departments within my employer to establish my right to exit in emergencies without having to have special procedures in 
place.  It was thought that I should wait at my desk for help as the building burned around me.  I was able to explain the problems with that approach and show 
through my own abilities that this was not necessary, but their concern came very much from all they had heard and read about the special needs of blind persons to 
travel about safely.  I am not trying to hang my experience completely on accessible pedestrian signals, but the idea that what we ask for cannot have a negative 
cumulate effect on our employability can only be held if one's head is in the sand.  

The division between many of us that I have discussed on other lists is this.  Does society owe us anything that minimizes our blindness as a right, or do we try to find 
ways of dealing with differences ourselves as much as possible and ask society for those things that we really need and can't resolve ourselves.  Most of us in the 
NFB fit into that second camp, and we feel that way after a lot of soul searching and a lot of thought.  The Jim Jones crap is simply a way of discrediting without 
having to participate in meaningful discussion.

Finally, until we recognize that we are not all going to see things in the same light and that differences of opinion are sometimes legitimate, there is little hope of ever 
finding common ground.  I have seen two references to Jim Jones and "Don't Drink the Kool-Aid," both aimed at us.  Maybe it has happened elsewhere, but I have 
seen nobody using similar analogies directed at those who favor some of the issues that you have mentioned on our lists.  I understand some of the logic of wanting 
tactile money.  However, I am uncomfortable with the notion that we are owed tactile money as a right without looking at the true impact and other possible options 
such as help with paying for money identifiers.  I am uncomfortable with spending millions to put tactile warning strips on subway platforms "for the blind" which have 
limited effectiveness and might even be dangerous in some situations when we should be addressing, as a society, making platforms more safe for everyone, 
especially small kids.  A broader view of that issue would be better for everyone including us.  I do not believe that society should have to pay several thousand 
dollars an intersection to put up a light so that some of us can say we have the same information as do sighted people when there are already reliable methods of 
deducing that information.  I do believe that putting up such signals where there is a clear demonstration of need is all right as has been expressed in NFB 
resolutions.  We live in complex times, and people who think the answers are simple are fooling themselves.  We will be far better off if we understand and try to 
respect one another's positions even when we do not agree with them.

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 12:45:20 -0800, Joel Deutsch wrote:

>Why do you guys keep arguing about this? Really, this NFB line about how it's either gonna be more job opportunities for the blind and or the useless bon bon of 
nice money you can feel, this is what people ought to be debating, and I mean literally debating. Someone ought to make an honest attempt to show some sort of 
data that prove that when the blind are given chirping traffic lights, the blind employment rate in that community falls. I'm only being slightly facetious. This is what 
the implication of the position sounds like to me. 
> 
>As for the "something for nothing" riff, this is getting into Jim Jones territory. What on earth does that mean? You're a citizen, you pay the taxes of the country, 
you participate in civic life by voting, etc., and there isn't anything in that about getting anything for nothing, for god's sake. What kind of wacko sadistic boot camp 
is this thing, anyway? That sounds crazy to most people, do you guys know that? I have mostly sighted friends, all professional, educated people, and they don't 
think anything like what you people insist society thinks about this false zero-sum opposition, as if it's either tactile subway strips or jobs, or trying to get something for 
nothing. You know, if you are sighted and go into a dark room and yell, "Hey, would someone mind turning on the lights?" no one yells "do it yourself, you sissy 
commie, you people who come in here when the lights are off are always asking for something for nothing. Grow up.
> 
>This is so exasperating. I've never heard more counterintuitive and suspect reasoning than what I keep hearing is behind NFB positions like this. It's really 
unnerving, speaking only for myself.
> 
>I wish I could be more polite about it, because I've been on this list a long time and appreciate its hospitality and its utility. It's been a friendly list to subscribe to, 
and a very helpful one, and I appreciate the NFB sponsoring it and Dave managing it. Sincerely, I do. But this stuff makes people crazier than I think you 
imagine. There's something very weird about it. My references to the NFB Kool aid, or Jim Jones, aren't arbitrary, just hyperbolic. Arghh.
> 
>----- Original Message -----
>From:
>mailto:Andrew.Baracco at va.gov Baracco, Andrew W
>To:
>mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
>Sent:
>Wednesday, December 06, 2006 12:25 PM
>Subject:
>Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>But, John, if your figures are correct about the number of visually
>impaired persons in the U. S. , and let's, for the sake of argument, say
>that the NFB has 50,000 members, even though I think that this figure is
>very much overstated, this would mean that at best, the NFB represents
>somewhere between 0.5% and 2.5% of the blind and visually impaired
>population. This hardly constitutes a majority, or even a significant
>minority. How many members the ACB has is irrelevent to this
>discussion, because the ACB is not implying that they speak for all
>blind persons. The truth is that the vast majority of blind persons
>consider themselves to be independent thinkers and do not feel that
>belonging to a membership organization of blind persons is worth their
>time and money, and doesn't really matter in the greater scheme of
>things.
>Andy
> 
>-----Original Message-----
>From: mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>[mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>On Behalf Of John Brown
>Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 11:30 AM
>To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>I am getting a bit frustrated with people spouting off who simply don't
>know what they are talking about. The legally blind population is
>approximately
>2 million and the number of those who have a visual problem that affects
>their daily lives is approximately ten million. One measure of NFB ACB
>representation and support is that a national NFB convention is
>approximately 3 times the size of an ACB convention. Check these facts
>out for yourself if you do not believe me. I would much rather have a
>job than feelable money, wouldn't you? Our biggest problem I think is
>that too many blind folk want and expect something for nothing. Please,
>lets get back to talking about technology.
>John Brown
>Nashville Tennessee
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Baracco, Andrew W" < mailto:Andrew.Baracco at va.gov Andrew.Baracco at va.gov
>>
>To: "NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List" < mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>>
>Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 1:57 PM
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>> The AFB recently estimated the number of blind persons living in the
>U.
>> S. as 10 million. For at least the last 30 years, the NFB has stated
>> that they have 50,000 members. Assuming this to be true, and not an
>> overstatement, as it probably is, the NFB represents, at most, only
>> one half of one percent of the blind population. This hardly
>> constitutes a majority, or even a significant minority. Even if the
>> blind population was overestimated, and is more like 2 million, which
>> is also an estimate I have seen, and again assuming that 50,000 figure
>> for NFB membership, this only constitutes 2.5 per cent. Still nothing
>> like a majority or significant number. This hardly constitutes the
>> voice of the nation's blind. And I do not think that equating the NFB
>> to the government of the United States is an analogy that holds water
>either.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>[mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>> On Behalf Of Seville Allen
>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 11:39 AM
>> To: 'NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>>
>> While you didn't appoint, or better possibly say you didn't elect, any
>> blind organization to speak for you, you are spoken for just by the
>> fact that, collectively, blind people are heard through a choir of
>> voices or an elected representative of a blind organization speaking.
>> This is the same for an American citizen who doesn't vote. He may not
>> have voted for our current American administration, but whether or not
>> he did, the fact is that the "elected leadership" speaks for the whole
>> organization of citizens.
>> So whether or not we join a blindness organization or an American
>> political party, we will be spoken for by someone who is known as the
>> leader by the system's definition.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>[mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>> On Behalf Of Hoffman, Allen
>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 10:18 AM
>> To: mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>> Subject: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>>
>>>From the previous post:
>> "Blind people traditionally identify paper currency by folding bills
>> of different denominations in different ways. "In reality, blind
>> people do not routinely find that we have been short-changed," Maurer
>commented.
>> Machines are readily available to identify paper money for blind
>> people who run businesses or handle large amounts of cash. 
>> "Essentially, the United States Treasury has been ordered by the
>> courts to come up with a solution for a nonexistent problem," Maurer
>said."
>>
>> I tend to generally agree with this, however, I for one never
>> appointed any organization or one "my voice", and while an
>> organization of the blind certainly has all rights to voice opinions,
>> saying that this isn't a problem for blind people is overstepping
>> their perspective. This is just like the whole tactile tiles for
>> identifying edges, audible traffic signals, etc. Just because some
>> don't "need" or "want" this kind of solution doesn't mean it isn't
>> "needed" or "wanted" by others. An analysis of traffic lights to me
>> seems like if traffic signals that are observable by people are
>> important for everyone else, then people who can't see the signal
>> should have a mechanism too, or why have the signal at all? People
>> who are blind should not be provided less as a general rule, not the
>> other way around in hopes of fostering some superman independent
>> image. I myself am not superman, but can be pretty independent. I
>> can live without money changes, audible traffic signals, or tactile
>> edges, however, I can live without Braille books, audio tapes, or
>screen readers too but why the heck should I?
>>
>> I get the feeling if ACB had filed for making the sky blue that the
>> NFB would file to change it. This kind of bickering just presents an
>> image of a bunch of people who can't ever be satisfied.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gui-talk mailing list
>> mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>> _______________________________________________
>> gui-talk mailing list
>> mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>_______________________________________________
>gui-talk mailing list
>mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>_______________________________________________
>gui-talk mailing list
>mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.11/575 - Release Date: 12/6/2006 12:22 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.11/575 - Release Date: 12/6/2006 12:22 PM
-------------- next part --------------
Steve,

Sorry to have ruffled your feathers.  I respect the work you do on behalf of the NFB, and I understand that you believe each effort is made on behalf of everyone blind in the United States.  Please permit me simply to think differently, from issue to issue.  As far as those damn chirping traffic lights go , I think you must be totally forgetting the millions of people whose vision is seriously impaired in ways that may be hard for you to imagine without thinking of them as simply "blind," which isn't correct.  If you don't understand this, I just don't know what to tell you. Age related Macular Degeneration?  Glaucoma?  RP?  Some, like RP people (including myself) have to make it part of their life to commit to learning new skills of adaptation in all sorts of ways as they head down a slow road toward what the sighted world considers literal blindness, which is about what you'd think of as light perception or less.

but the rest don't even need a cane to walk down the street, unless maybe to warn others not to walk into them because, say, their central retinal function is zapped.  Do you understand what that means, physiologically and optically?  I sometimes wonder.  And those people may never think of getting O and M training, let alone learning all the blind martial arts-level skills of judging the air pressure at an intersection or all those other techniques. They just wanna know if the light's green or red!  What's so damn awful about that?  And these are more people Steve, than you think.  Many more.  You've just got to understand you're working within a comparatively small demographic and demanding that everyone with what sighted people would consider meaningfully low vision but not "blindness," fall into step with your paradigm.  It isn't that simple, is all I'm almost ever trying to suggest to you at times like this.  And please, do email me the first time someone falls onto the F Train tracks on their way home to Brooklyn because of blind edge stripping.  That stuff is hard to believe.

I don't know.  You are offended by the Jonestown allusion?  I don't blame you.  But of course no one is saying such things about anyone else in the blind community, or about the other organizations.  It's just the way the NFB's  rigid vision is perceived.  By a lot of people, Steve. Not all ACB people who feel themselves in organizational competition with you.  Why do you think that?

I grow weary.  Look, sorry you're offended.  But some NFB honcho in Northern California gave me my first unfortunate look at this forbidding world of ultra Orthodox blindness, and as I slide further along toward functional blindness, it scares me more and more to think of that culture.  And these rationales just exacerbate my mistrust and apprehension.  It's all personal, Steve.  I'm no politician.  I'm not involved in some hassle between you and the ACB or Diebold or some Ohio congressman.  I don't care about that stuff very much.  It's the culture, and its seems frighteningly parochial to me.

I'm just being honest.  And with all due respect.  And so forth. Honestly.

From:
mailto:steve.jacobson at visi.com Steve Jacobson
To:
mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
Sent:
Wednesday, December 06, 2006 2:47 PM
Subject:
Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
Joel and others,
I agree that we need to wind this down on this list, but at the same time I am sorry that you feel as you do.  The fact is that there are two strongly-held valid
viewpoints on several of these subjects.  Given today's tendency toward political correctness, do you truly think most of the public is going to voice the opinion that
we should not have whatever we ask for? 
While I can see there is no point in arguing the issues, I do feel there is a point to make the case that both viewpoints are valid and not counterintuitive or any of the
other rather insulting characterizations that were in your note.  I've been involved here in Minnesota with the approval and establishment of voting machines, and
there is a definite backlash in some areas.  That doesn't make it wrong, but it illustrates that there are prices to pay.  I also have seen some of our web accessibility
efforts with which you probably agree cause employers to feel that their internal web sites might not be accessible, an issue that would not come to light unless blind
employees are hired.  In that case, one has to balance the benefit to blind people overall against the negatives of possible reactions of specific employers.  It used to
be almost standard practice in the 1970's for agencies for the blind to purchase equipment necessary for a blind person to do a given job.  Now, the employer is
expected to buy it.  In many jobs, it will cost employers more to hire a blind employee for the same position and this is not some counter-intuitive theory but fact.  It
puts us at a disadvantage, and people need to recognize that.
I have personally had to negotiate with departments within my employer to establish my right to exit in emergencies without having to have special procedures in
place.  It was thought that I should wait at my desk for help as the building burned around me.  I was able to explain the problems with that approach and show
through my own abilities that this was not necessary, but their concern came very much from all they had heard and read about the special needs of blind persons to
travel about safely.  I am not trying to hang my experience completely on accessible pedestrian signals, but the idea that what we ask for cannot have a negative
cumulate effect on our employability can only be held if one's head is in the sand. 
The division between many of us that I have discussed on other lists is this.  Does society owe us anything that minimizes our blindness as a right, or do we try to find
ways of dealing with differences ourselves as much as possible and ask society for those things that we really need and can't resolve ourselves.  Most of us in the
NFB fit into that second camp, and we feel that way after a lot of soul searching and a lot of thought.  The Jim Jones crap is simply a way of discrediting without
having to participate in meaningful discussion.
Finally, until we recognize that we are not all going to see things in the same light and that differences of opinion are sometimes legitimate, there is little hope of ever
finding common ground.  I have seen two references to Jim Jones and "Don't Drink the Kool-Aid," both aimed at us.  Maybe it has happened elsewhere, but I have
seen nobody using similar analogies directed at those who favor some of the issues that you have mentioned on our lists.  I understand some of the logic of wanting
tactile money.  However, I am uncomfortable with the notion that we are owed tactile money as a right without looking at the true impact and other possible options
such as help with paying for money identifiers.  I am uncomfortable with spending millions to put tactile warning strips on subway platforms "for the blind" which have
limited effectiveness and might even be dangerous in some situations when we should be addressing, as a society, making platforms more safe for everyone,
especially small kids.  A broader view of that issue would be better for everyone including us.  I do not believe that society should have to pay several thousand
dollars an intersection to put up a light so that some of us can say we have the same information as do sighted people when there are already reliable methods of
deducing that information.  I do believe that putting up such signals where there is a clear demonstration of need is all right as has been expressed in NFB
resolutions.  We live in complex times, and people who think the answers are simple are fooling themselves.  We will be far better off if we understand and try to
respect one another's positions even when we do not agree with them.
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 12:45:20 -0800, Joel Deutsch wrote:
>Why do you guys keep arguing about this? Really, this NFB line about how it's either gonna be more job opportunities for the blind and or the useless bon bon of
nice money you can feel, this is what people ought to be debating, and I mean literally debating. Someone ought to make an honest attempt to show some sort of
data that prove that when the blind are given chirping traffic lights, the blind employment rate in that community falls. I'm only being slightly facetious. This is what
the implication of the position sounds like to me.
>
>As for the "something for nothing" riff, this is getting into Jim Jones territory. What on earth does that mean? You're a citizen, you pay the taxes of the country,
you participate in civic life by voting, etc., and there isn't anything in that about getting anything for nothing, for god's sake. What kind of wacko sadistic boot camp
is this thing, anyway? That sounds crazy to most people, do you guys know that? I have mostly sighted friends, all professional, educated people, and they don't
think anything like what you people insist society thinks about this false zero-sum opposition, as if it's either tactile subway strips or jobs, or trying to get something for
nothing. You know, if you are sighted and go into a dark room and yell, "Hey, would someone mind turning on the lights?" no one yells "do it yourself, you sissy
commie, you people who come in here when the lights are off are always asking for something for nothing. Grow up.
>
>This is so exasperating. I've never heard more counterintuitive and suspect reasoning than what I keep hearing is behind NFB positions like this. It's really
unnerving, speaking only for myself.
>
>I wish I could be more polite about it, because I've been on this list a long time and appreciate its hospitality and its utility. It's been a friendly list to subscribe to,
and a very helpful one, and I appreciate the NFB sponsoring it and Dave managing it. Sincerely, I do. But this stuff makes people crazier than I think you
imagine. There's something very weird about it. My references to the NFB Kool aid, or Jim Jones, aren't arbitrary, just hyperbolic. Arghh.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From:
>mailto:Andrew.Baracco at va.gov Baracco, Andrew W
>To:
>mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
>Sent:
>Wednesday, December 06, 2006 12:25 PM
>Subject:
>Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>But, John, if your figures are correct about the number of visually
>impaired persons in the U. S. , and let's, for the sake of argument, say
>that the NFB has 50,000 members, even though I think that this figure is
>very much overstated, this would mean that at best, the NFB represents
>somewhere between 0.5% and 2.5% of the blind and visually impaired
>population. This hardly constitutes a majority, or even a significant
>minority. How many members the ACB has is irrelevent to this
>discussion, because the ACB is not implying that they speak for all
>blind persons. The truth is that the vast majority of blind persons
>consider themselves to be independent thinkers and do not feel that
>belonging to a membership organization of blind persons is worth their
>time and money, and doesn't really matter in the greater scheme of
>things.
>Andy
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>[mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>On Behalf Of John Brown
>Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 11:30 AM
>To: NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>I am getting a bit frustrated with people spouting off who simply don't
>know what they are talking about. The legally blind population is
>approximately
>2 million and the number of those who have a visual problem that affects
>their daily lives is approximately ten million. One measure of NFB ACB
>representation and support is that a national NFB convention is
>approximately 3 times the size of an ACB convention. Check these facts
>out for yourself if you do not believe me. I would much rather have a
>job than feelable money, wouldn't you? Our biggest problem I think is
>that too many blind folk want and expect something for nothing. Please,
>lets get back to talking about technology.
>John Brown
>Nashville Tennessee
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Baracco, Andrew W" < mailto:Andrew.Baracco at va.gov mailto:Andrew.Baracco at va.gov
mailto:Andrew.Baracco at va.gov Andrew.Baracco at va.gov
>>
>To: "NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List" < mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org
mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>>
>Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 1:57 PM
>Subject: Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>> The AFB recently estimated the number of blind persons living in the
>U.
>> S. as 10 million. For at least the last 30 years, the NFB has stated
>> that they have 50,000 members. Assuming this to be true, and not an
>> overstatement, as it probably is, the NFB represents, at most, only
>> one half of one percent of the blind population. This hardly
>> constitutes a majority, or even a significant minority. Even if the
>> blind population was overestimated, and is more like 2 million, which
>> is also an estimate I have seen, and again assuming that 50,000 figure
>> for NFB membership, this only constitutes 2.5 per cent. Still nothing
>> like a majority or significant number. This hardly constitutes the
>> voice of the nation's blind. And I do not think that equating the NFB
>> to the government of the United States is an analogy that holds water
>either.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>[mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>> On Behalf Of Seville Allen
>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 11:39 AM
>> To: 'NFBnet GUI Talk Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>>
>> While you didn't appoint, or better possibly say you didn't elect, any
>> blind organization to speak for you, you are spoken for just by the
>> fact that, collectively, blind people are heard through a choir of
>> voices or an elected representative of a blind organization speaking.
>> This is the same for an American citizen who doesn't vote. He may not
>> have voted for our current American administration, but whether or not
>> he did, the fact is that the "elected leadership" speaks for the whole
>> organization of citizens.
>> So whether or not we join a blindness organization or an American
>> political party, we will be spoken for by someone who is known as the
>> leader by the system's definition.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org
>[mailto:gui-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org]
>> On Behalf Of Hoffman, Allen
>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 10:18 AM
>> To: mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org
mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>> Subject: [gui-talk] NFB on accessible money
>>
>>>From the previous post:
>> "Blind people traditionally identify paper currency by folding bills
>> of different denominations in different ways. "In reality, blind
>> people do not routinely find that we have been short-changed," Maurer
>commented.
>> Machines are readily available to identify paper money for blind
>> people who run businesses or handle large amounts of cash.
>> "Essentially, the United States Treasury has been ordered by the
>> courts to come up with a solution for a nonexistent problem," Maurer
>said."
>>
>> I tend to generally agree with this, however, I for one never
>> appointed any organization or one "my voice", and while an
>> organization of the blind certainly has all rights to voice opinions,
>> saying that this isn't a problem for blind people is overstepping
>> their perspective. This is just like the whole tactile tiles for
>> identifying edges, audible traffic signals, etc. Just because some
>> don't "need" or "want" this kind of solution doesn't mean it isn't
>> "needed" or "wanted" by others. An analysis of traffic lights to me
>> seems like if traffic signals that are observable by people are
>> important for everyone else, then people who can't see the signal
>> should have a mechanism too, or why have the signal at all? People
>> who are blind should not be provided less as a general rule, not the
>> other way around in hopes of fostering some superman independent
>> image. I myself am not superman, but can be pretty independent. I
>> can live without money changes, audible traffic signals, or tactile
>> edges, however, I can live without Braille books, audio tapes, or
>screen readers too but why the heck should I?
>>
>> I get the feeling if ACB had filed for making the sky blue that the
>> NFB would file to change it. This kind of bickering just presents an
>> image of a bunch of people who can't ever be satisfied.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gui-talk mailing list
>> mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org
mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>> _______________________________________________
>> gui-talk mailing list
>> mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org
mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>_______________________________________________
>gui-talk mailing list
>mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>_______________________________________________
>gui-talk mailing list
>mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.11/575 - Release Date: 12/6/2006 12:22 PM
_______________________________________________
gui-talk mailing list
mailto:gui-talk at nfbnet.org gui-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/gui-talk
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.15.11/575 - Release Date: 12/6/2006 12:22 PM