[nfb-talk] Fw: To Be or Not to Be, Irritated

Aaron Cannon cannona at fireantproductions.com
Mon May 12 14:20:43 CDT 2008


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Interesting. Thanks for both replies.  I will have to give this some further
thought.

Fortunately, at present for me at least, the point is moot, as the bus stop
is about 50 steps from my front door.  But I was curious, like I said.

Thanks.

Aaron


- --
Skype: cannona
MSN/Windows Messenger: cannona at hotmail.com (don't send email to the hotmail
address.)
- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Powers, Terry (NIH/OD/DEAS) [E]" <powerst at dcpcepn.nci.nih.gov>
To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: To Be or Not to Be, Irritated


I would not say it is abusing the system.  I would say it is poor planning.
When I bought my last condo I had a few requests; no stairs, a londry room,
at least 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, near shopping and I made sure there was
bussing near by.  I use metro access to get to work and my husband picks me
up at night.  This prevents to much wair and tair on the car.  When he is
not around, there will be busses, metro access and cabs for me to use.
Also, I lucked out and my sister moved near by.  I made sure there were
busses because I did not want to totally have to depend on metro access, or
cabs.  I still may have to hitch a ride to the bus stop due to other health
problems, but at least all my neads are there for when I need them.  I would
never want to just have to live off the support of Metro access.  My morning
ride is usually very good, but the later the worse it gets.

Terry Powers


- -----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Cannon [mailto:cannona at fireantproductions.com]
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 9:55 AM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: To Be or Not to Be, Irritated

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Hi William.

Let's say for example that I have a choice of where I will live between two
houses.  The first is on a bus rout, and the second is not, but it does have
para-transit service available.  The first house is more expensive than the
second, but not so much as to make it out of the question.  The second house
is situated in more the type of atmosphere I would prefer to live in, but
the first is not so bad as to be out of the question.

If I choose to live in the second house, and I use para-transit, is that an
abuse of the system?
I do agree with you that a lot of people are abusing the system and that it
does hurt us, but I think we might differ somewhat on how we define abuse.

Please also know that I am not simply arguing for the sake of doing so.  I
am genuinely curious how folks feel about para-transit.

Sincerely
Aaron Cannon


- - --
Skype: cannona
MSN/Windows Messenger: cannona at hotmail.com (don't send email to the hotmail
address.)
- - ----- Original Message -----
From: "Wm. Ritchhart" <william.ritchhart at sbcglobal.net>
To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: To Be or Not to Be, Irritated


Aaron,

You did indeed miss something!  Read my post again.  Pay careful attention
to the word CHOOSE!.

I have no problem with any blind person who really needs Para transit using
it.  I do have a problem with blind people who make choices that make them
dependent by choice.  These people and the lazy are the ones who make Para
transit unavailable or inconvenient for the ones who truly need it.




William


- - -----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces+william.ritchhart=sbcglobal.net at nfbnet.org
[mailto:nfb-talk-bounces+william.ritchhart=sbcglobal.net at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Aaron Cannon
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 5:26 PM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: To Be or Not to Be, Irritated

- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

That's interesting that you would lump those who use para-transit because
they are lazy in with those who use it because they live far from a bus
route.  Frankly, I don't think that's fair.  If all municipalities had good
bus service, and if the cost of housing and crime rate was static no matter
where you lived, and if there were no other variables that would make it
more advantageous to live off the beaten path, then I might agree with you.
However, sometimes, living far from a bus route is the only reasonable
choice.

Were I in that circumstance, I don't think I would have an issue with using
para-transit.  Although, it wouldn't be my first choice.  Depending on
para-transit to get you anywhere regularly and on time is a gamble.  My
first choice would be to hire a driver or carpool, but if that weren't an
option, I wouldn't see a problem with using para-transit.

Am I missing something?  I very well may be, so if so, please do tell.

Thanks.

Aaron


- - - --
Skype: cannona
MSN/Windows Messenger: cannona at hotmail.com (don't send email to the hotmail
address.)
- - - ----- Original Message -----
From: "Wm. Ritchhart" <william.ritchhart at sbcglobal.net>
To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: To Be or Not to Be, Irritated


Mike,

I had a view like Bennett's.  However it has modified somewhat over the past
few years.  I for the longest time believed that no blind person had any
business using Para-transit.  However I have seen some blind folks who do to
their abilities will never be able to independently travel.  These people
need Para-transit to avoid getting themselves hurt or killed.

The problem is those blind people who use Para-transit because they are to
lazy to use the regular transit.  I also know of many blind people who use
Para-transit because they choose to live where Para-transit is their only
choice.  These folks do great damage to others from their choices.  They are
the ones who should be forced off of Para-transit.
However they cannot be removed.

I am in favor of requiring that true need be demonstrated before we allow
blind people on to Para-transit.  That I am sure is a minority view.  We
require means test for all kinds of other services for people.
I see nothing wrong with a means-test of sorts for Para-transit.


William


- - - -----Original Message-----
From: nfb-talk-bounces+william.ritchhart=sbcglobal.net at nfbnet.org
[mailto:nfb-talk-bounces+william.ritchhart=sbcglobal.net at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Mike Freeman
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 11:17 PM
To: NFB Talk Mailing List
Subject: [nfb-talk] Fw: To Be or Not to Be, Irritated

- - - ----- Original Message -----
From: Bennett
To: Mike Freeman
Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated


This is great.  Over on blindlaw, some folks are opining about whether
blindness is a mobility impairment, and justifying why they use paratransit.
I have modified my position a bit on paratransit.  I can think of situations
where it is necessary, particularly if there are no fixed routes in the
area.  However, when a blind person can take a bus, train, plane, etc, I
don't believe a disability based transit system is nnecessary for the blind,
and it could do us severe dammage as well.

I travel quite a bit in different and new parts of the country for my job.
I wouldn't nor could I ask my employer to provide a guide, someone

to take me to different places.  I would soon not be assigned to the great
on-site visits, etc, because the budget wouldn't support travel for two.  (I
have a personal experience that would confirm this.)  If I can afford to pay
a driver, I do it.  Transit sometimes makes it a long tgrip if I have to go
somewhere, but I don't consider that a mobility issue.

finally, I am extremely concerned when folks haven't had the training, and
need someone to help them every step of the way to a new place, or even in
large, not blind friendly hotels, etc.  As the Mikes point out, we *must*
learn to get along in a sighted world.  We *must* travel independently,
without assistance where we can.  We can ask directions, and even ask
confirming questions along the way, but we can find our destinations even
when new and out of the way by just keeping on and getting there.  some
would say, they'd rather be led or taken somewhere so they wouldn't look
like they are lost, or cause others to be burdened

by us. I believe this is purely and simply a false rationale for not
improving in mobility skills.  It is because of fear of the unknown, in
short fear of being less dependent on sighted help.

 I contend, we are doing a great disservice to ourselves, and the other
blind persons--we are demonstgrating incompetence, and hurting our image

as equal partners in the world when we unnecessarily need a guide in our

travels.  It might be more comfortable to let a sighted person lead us
around, but it certainly doesn't make us equal partners.  We will always

be thought of as needing help.  Unable to do the average job, etc, without
being given everything, lead around and accommodated in every way.

Please don't misunderstand, I am talking about the way we function in the
world.  I am not trying to dennigrate sighted guides at all.  I use one when
necessary, and even convenient. I enjoy and feel fortunate to have friends
that don't mind, and even like to walk together.  But I also know, and am
very confident. travelling separately, and without worry.

Doctor Jernigan's article on "The Nature of Independence" is excellent
concerning these issues.

Just my rant for the evening.  (grin.

/s/

Bennett Prows
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Mike Freeman
  To: Bennett Prows
  Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 5:10 PM
  Subject: Fw: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated


  Right on!

  Mike Freeman
  ... "It is human nature to think wisely and act foolishly." -- Anatole

France


  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Michael Bullis
  To: 'NFB Talk Mailing List'
  Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 2:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated


  I would second Mike's thoughts about excessive accommodation.  The
  unfortunate reality is that when you go to work there will be little or no
  accommodation--particularly in private industry and/or in small
businesses.
  You have to figure out how to get memo's, strategic plans, the bosses next
  great idea.  You make friends with secretaries, function in meetings
without
  the print document, ask questions that reveal information without making a
  big deal, or no deal at all if you're smart, about the fact that a
document
  wasn't provided to you in advance in an accessible format.  It's about
  survival skills.  It's about problem solving.  It's about functioning in a
  sighted world and dealing with it.

  Unfortunately, schools actually do much to inhibit the learning of these
  much needed skills.  They become enablers of dependent behaviours in the
  name of providing access.  I see far to many young people who obtain jobs
  right out of college and then languish, unpromoted and clearly not on a
  career track.  The person blaims it on discrimination and on unfairness.
  True, true.  But, with a little savy, that blind person could move up,

could
  find that career path.  Ultimately, it comes down to seeing ones self as
  being personally responsible for the outcome and finding a way to get
there.

  The law be damned as far as I'm concerned.  We should only be asking
society
  for things we absolutely need, not things that make our lives more
  convenient.  I am one of those who think that accessible voting is
probably
  a case in which we should have left the matter alone.  Yes, yes, I know,
  "It's a right" and all that.  But, frankly, I was doing just fine without
  that particular right and we have heaped mountains of attention on
ourselves
  and our so-called right.  Let's remember that no right is obtained without
  the backlash of hostility.  This hostility will come through our fight

for
  accessible voting.  It will come through our insistence that quiet cars
make
  noise.  It will come if our money should be require to be accessible.
It
  comes with our insistence that the web be accessible.

  What bothers me most about these discussions isn't that we have them.
It is
  that there is far to little consideration amongst some groups about the
  price to be paid.  The price in lost jobs because employers think we can't
  deal with our money, the price to be paid because they think we can't even
  cross streets unless we have a special traffic signal, Etc.  For my money,
  (accessible or not), if I'm going to pay a price to society, I want to

make
  sure it's for something I absolutely need, not just something that would
be
  nice.  Underlying our fight for equal treatment needs to be a deep
  cognisance of our need to take personal responsibility for our blindness.
  Mike Bullis
  Baltimore Maryland
  Mike Bullis




  -----Original Message-----
  From: nfb-talk-bounces+mabullis=hotmail.com at nfbnet.org
  [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces+mabullis=hotmail.com at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of

Mike
  Freeman
  Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 4:29 PM
  To: NFB Talk Mailing List
  Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated

  Joseph:

  You cite Auburn U as a model of DSS functioning. But are we really doing
  students a favor if we provide them with something they will no longer

have
  on the "outside"? I think part of our problems today stems from the fact
  that students come to expect that most everything will be provided for

them
  and when they hit the world of competitive industry and find that they've
  been living in a fools' paradise, they scream "discrimination" bloody
murder
  because they haven't learned yet that in the real world, they are
  responsible in large measure for their own accommodations. Never mind
  whether it's "fair" or not -- the question of fairness is largely
  irrelevant!

  Mike Freeman
  .. "It is human nature to think wisely and act foolishly." -- Anatole
  France


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: T. Joseph Carter
    To: NFB Talk Mailing List
    Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 2:06 AM
    Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated


    Jim,

    In special education, we often hear that if one student gets
  something,
    they all should get it.  That's fair, right?  Let's consider the
  question
    of what's fair from two different perspectives:

    Let's say we were both children, maybe eight years old.  You see that
  I
    just got a cookie for my good behavior.  You want one too, don't you?
  You
    have also been on your best behavior, and so you deserve a cookie if

I
  do!
    It's only fair--fairness means we get the same, you and I.

    But let us say for a moment that we both live in a poverty-stricken
    village and there is a food shortage.  The United States has just
  dropped
    two large crates of food to help feed the ten families that live in
  the
    village.  We, the heads of our households, each take one tenth of the
  food
    to feed our families.  It's only fair, right?  I have a family of
  three,
    and you have a family of seven.  You have more than twice as many
  people
    to feed, so the food should be divided in such a way that we each have
    enough to feed our families for a time.  Fairness means not that we
  get
    the same, but rather that we each get what we need of the resources
  that
    are available.

    Young children cannot understand this second form of fairness because
  they
    have not yet developed the ability to view the world from a
  perspective of
    someone other than themselves yet.  In special education, we sometimes
    have to remind people that this second sort of fairness is what really
  is
    important here.  There are finite resources, and we must divide them
  among
    our students according to the needs of each, not so that the students
  each
    get the same thing.  That means one student sometimes gets things
  another
    does not, even if they don't understand why that is.

    By now I'm sure you realize I mean to say that the situation is the
  same
    with resources given to adults with disabilities.  Sighted people have
  a
    light to help them cross.  Wheelchair users have a ramp to help them
    cross.  Why should not a blind person have a beep to help him cross?
    Because the sighted person needs the light, not knowing the rules of
    crossing a street in the same way that we do.  A wheelchair user may
  not
    be able to cross the street without that ramp.  But you and I don't
  need
    any help crossing that street because we know how to do it.  So the
    resources that might be applied to making a chirping signal should
  rightly
    go elsewhere.


    I look at the situation in much the same way.  Either we adapt to the
    world or we make the world adapt to us.  The NFB generally speaking
  says
    we should adapt to the world.  That's our default view.  It is only
  when
    the world deliberately chooses to exclude us do we take action to
  change
    the world (as you note, Target comes to mind.)

    Otherwise, we encourage people who are blind to do the adapting.
It's
    more work, it's a lot harder, and the results aren't always what we'd
  like
    them to be, but it's a very realistic viewpoint in that the majority
  of
    the world simply doesn't care about us enough to give us a second
  thought.
    Often, we don't even rate a first thought!

    The ACB takes the other approach, and it is equally valid, if somewhat
    less realistic in my own view.  They seek to change the world so that
    blind people have the same opportunities as sighted people, without
    jumping through lots of hoops first.  We Federationists generally
  disagree
    with this approach first because it isn't actually going to happen any
    time soon, and second because sometimes sighted people get the wrong
    impression if they see things being done differently for us.  We want
  to
    change attitudes and low expectations, not reinforce them.

    The NFB way isn't always right.  The currency case is one area I
  believe
    this to be so--just because we CAN manage our money using alternative
    techniques does not mean the inability to tell which of two bills is
  the
    $20 and which is the dollar is a good thing.  Oh sure we can do it if
  we
    have a pricey little gadget and maybe a fresh set of batteries, but a
    little measuring key that folds up to the size of a credit card would
  be
    better.

    I believe this is a resource that should be allocated to us not
  because we
    must have it, but because it is the right thing to do.  That doesn't
  make
    me ready to join the ACB--I don't subscribe to their view of how the
  world
    should fit blind people.  This time, though, they've hit upon
  something
    important.  Not AS important as, say, solving the hybrid car problem
  or
    ensuring that blind people have the opportunities and skills needed to
    find successful and meaningful employment, but important all the same.


    As to the DSO issue...  The best DSO I have heard of to date with
  regard
    to alternative format textbooks is Auburn University (thanks again to
    Dezman), where the university takes care of all of that stuff when
    possible well in advance of the student having the reasonable
  opportunity
    to do the necessary things themselves.  They do it not to discourage
    students from advocating for themselves or developing and applying the
    best alternative techniques they can.  No, they do it to make sure
  that
    when the term starts, you aren't immediately behind because you're
  dealing
    with textbook issues.

    If for some reason that happens, the DSO will already have
  communicated
    with the professor about it.  Sometimes the right thing is to
  encourage
    personal responsibility and self-advocacy.  Sometimes the right thing
  is
    to give them the tools they need to be successful when they need those
    tools, and not letting them have the need or opportunity to practice

a
    maladaptive skill like making excuses, even valid ones.

    In Auburn's case, it also means never asking a student to pay hundreds
  of
    dollars for textbooks and then surrender them to be literally
  destroyed
    for the DSO's convenience and budget.  But that's another thread and
    another list.  *grin*

    Joseph

    On Fri, May 09, 2008 at 02:28:04PM -0600, Jim Marks wrote:
    > Thanks, Joseph.  Your thoughtful response is not only good, it's
    > appreciated.
    >
    > John and others often toss analogies into discussions that go like
  this:
    > Wheelchair users get something, sighted people get something, so
  blind
    > people should get the same thing.  I worked for several years in a
  center
    > for independent living.  These centers focus mostly on making
  environments
    > accessible by people with disabilities.  As a blind center staff
  member, I
    > never felt like the environmental remedy was doing the job for the
  blind.  I
    > was looking for a better answer and found it in the NFB.  There I
  learned
    > about making choices that presumed personal responsibility and
  power.  I
    > learned that all people with disabilities have two choices in life
  in order
    > to compete on equal footing with our peers.  We either change
  ourselves
    > through positive attitudes and actions or we change the environment.
  Most
    > of us blend the two options for the best effect.  It is possible to
    > over-emphasize either option.  The NFB certainly is in favor of
    > environmental accessibility.  We see it in things like the Target
  website
    > lawsuit and in the development of technologies.  However, the first
  tool
    > applied in the NFB philosophy is personal responsibility and power.
  It's
    > hard to put into words that don't sound like clichés, but the NFB
  acts on
    > the principle that it's OK to be blind.  The more we believe in
  ourselves,
    > the less we look for environmental solutions.  And as a consequence
  of the
    > self-reliance and self-determination, we often also find ourselves
  in the
    > role of the givers rather than the takers.  At the same time, we
  should not
    > shy away from asking for environmental modifications that make
  sense.
    >
    > One last thing I wanted to say is that I am professionally
  responsible for
    > access to my university by all people with disabilities.  The NFB
  philosophy
    > serves this cause well, especially when one pays attention to the
  individual
    > impact of various disabilities.  It is possible to deliver access
  services
    > in such a way that the disability service office creates dependence.
  We can
    > kill opportunities for the people we serve by doing for them the
  things they
    > can do for themselves.  I grow weary of those who want to solve
  every
    > disability issue with environmental fixes.  People must learn how to
    > function in any environment, accessible or otherwise.  The last
  thing we
    > want to do is to create a society of people who wait for others to
  take the
    > point on what amounts to very personal functions.  Some have a right
  to more
    > environmental fixes than others due to the logical link between the
  impact
    > of their disabilities and the program modification.  But blind
  students get
    > trapped in one-size-fits-all approaches that never look at what
  blind people
    > can do for themselves.  This is at least one reason by blind and
  visually
    > impaired college students comprise the only group of students with
    > disabilities in higher education that's shrinking.  Over reliance on
    > environmental fixes hurt blind people.  Yet we still see people
  calling for
    > those fixes on the grounds that others get them.  We also see people
  using
    > environmental modifications as though they are cures for the
  disabilities.
    > Access will never turn a blind person into a sighted person.  The
  goal is
    > not to be a sighted person who cannot see, but rather a blind person
  who
    > functions well as a blind person and who is a peer in a diverse
  world.
    >
    > -------
    > Jim Marks
    > blind.grizzly at gmail.com
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > nfb-talk mailing list
    > nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
    > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
    > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
  for nfb-talk:
    >

http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/tjosephcarter%40gmail.com
    _______________________________________________
    nfb-talk mailing list
    nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
    http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
    To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
  nfb-talk:
    http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/k7uij%40panix.com
  _______________________________________________
  nfb-talk mailing list
  nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
  nfb-talk:
  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/mabullis%40hotmail.com

  _______________________________________________
  nfb-talk mailing list
  nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
  http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/k7uij%40panix.com
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/william.ritchhart%40sbcgl
obal.net

_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/cannona%40fireantproducti
ons.com

- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.959
Comment: Key available from all major key servers.

iEYEAREDAAYFAkgnZG4ACgkQI7J99hVZuJcPZACfea5iUg3EtdBwgwg9O/v+vSJG
0hwAni7hinR8K2OSP7FWzTHk4suyNQNA
=Ozu4
- - -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/william.ritchhart%40sbcgl
obal.net

_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/cannona%40fireantproductions.com

- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.959
Comment: Key available from all major key servers.

iEYEAREDAAYFAkgoTTIACgkQI7J99hVZuJeTEgCgurlo8pYJAUaJrJFXBsFUyUSL
LCEAoNZTQqC0KubiVtoo+0ozH6GgyB7j
=eoIU
- -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/powerst%40dcpcepn.nci.nih.gov
_______________________________________________
nfb-talk mailing list
nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfb-talk:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfb-talk/cannona%40fireantproductions.com

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.959
Comment: Key available from all major key servers.

iEYEAREDAAYFAkgomJcACgkQI7J99hVZuJfTIACeLjDO++5IHZnvXUQLuqnTAx9E
umIAnR2E0XSGQ9yrAL+jUXprynenWgu7
=2gnZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the nfb-talk mailing list