[nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
David Andrews
dandrews at visi.com
Wed May 14 12:13:41 CDT 2008
There was a long article in the most recent Choice Magazine
Listening, from the New York Times about the Supreme Court and how
business-friendly it now is.
If the currency issue reaches it, and the business community puts up
a squawk about how expensive the whole thing would be, then it is
going down.!!!
And -- whether or not we disagree with the whole thing, it ultimately
would not be in the interest of blind people for that to happen.
Dave
At 10:53 PM 5/13/2008, you wrote:
>Mike:
>
>As should have become obvious over the past few days, I agree with you
>completely. I'm more worried about the accessible currency issue
>reaching the Supreme Court than about its merit or lack thereof per se
>also.
>
>And I agree with you about the accessible web site issue. However, I
>must say that there's an additional wrinkle on this one: how does one
>define in legally-exact language, what "accessible" means? It's a moving
>target. And, to some degree, how accessible a given site is depends upon
>the skill of the blind user and of his/her level of knowledge of his/her
>access technology.
>
>Moreover, styles of web programming are constantly evolving and so it's
>not always easy to delineate where the boundary between the area of
>responsibility of the web programmer and that of the access technology
>designer lies. And, as I say, this adds to the difficulty of truly
>writing access legislation that has any chance of relevancy for anything
>but a brief period.
>
>It seems to me that often, "accessibility" ends up being like Potter
>Stewart's observation of pornography: "I can't define it but I know it
>when I see it!". It's not easy to define accessibility but it's obvious
>to us when a given piece of software or web site is accesible (or, more
>often, is not).
>
>As the stomach turns ....
>
>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: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 5:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
>
>
> I'll take one more whack at this topic. First of all I should say
>that this
> thread has been one of the most interesting for me in quite some time.
>But,
> it does sound like it's degenerating a bit.
>
> Just a word about the supposed inconsistencies in NFB's philosophy.
>The
> reason we vote on resolutions is that there are not always bright
>lines that
> can be drawn leaving accessible money on one side and accessible
>voting
> machines on the other. I wish there were. Furthermore, people of
>good will
> disagree about whether, or how much, backlash occurs and how much we
>should
> be willing to live with. That's the problem. People don't simply do
>the
> right thing and agree with me. If they did, life would be so much
>more
> smooth and easy to deal with (laugh).
>
> NFB does have some inconsistent positions when observed from different
> points of view. That's the nature of social change. Not all blacks
>agreed
> with bus boycots and not all college kids staged sit-ins in the 60's.
>Some
> people like the Black Panthers wanted to take things to a completely
> different level. That's just the way it is.
>
> My opposition to the accessible money issue has more to do with not
>wanting
> it to get to the Supreme Court than it does with the idea of
>accessible
> money. However, having said that, I don't see accessible money as a
> necessity, but rather, a thing that would be nice to have. And, just
>so the
> record is clear, NFB has taken various positions on the matter and may
> change it's position again. Again, that's the messy problem with a
>voting
> membership. New generations come along and see things differently.
>
> As to the need for an accessible web. I think that virtually all in
>the
> blind commmunity see this one as a need rather than a desire. If we
>can't
> access the modern web we're essentially left out of the main stream of
> society. I don't think any organized group disagrees with that
>concept.
> And, since the subject of backlash has come up, yes, there is a
>backlash
> against the blind because of our demands for an accessible web. It
>comes
> from small web sites that see accessibility as a needless expense they
>are
> "forced" to make. It also comes from State agencies that don't have
>people
> who can program accessibility features correctly and resent getting
>the
> training or contracting for the service from outside. Take a look at
>the
> number of government websites at all levels that are not accessible
>and
> you're seeing passive aggressive behaviour in many cases. They're
>saying,
> "This is crap and we won't do it."
>
> Well, anyway, all this is interesting and thanks for a great thread
>over the
> last couple of weeks. It has truly stimulated my thinking in many
>areas.
> 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
>John
> G. Heim
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 7:40 PM
> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
>
> What is your point? My point was that the NFB has applied it's own
> philosophy inconsistently. In fact, the NFB's philosophy cannot be
>applied
> consistently without doing harm to blind people.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kathleen A. Millhoff" <kamillhoff at gdoe.net>
> To: "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 6:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
>
>
> > Okay, why not
> > say that about accessible voting machines? Why not say that about
>Target's
> > web site? Accessible money is too expensive? Why not say that about
> > accessible voting machines? If you're concerned about a backlash if
>money
> > is
> > made accessible, why not worry about a backlash if web sites h
> > Ju pasting in your comments here in order to ask the rhetorical
>question:
> > if the road to hell is paved with good intentions,
> > isn't the road to chaos paved with generalizations?
> > kat
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nfb-talk-bounces+kamillhoff=gdoe.net at nfbnet.org
> > [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces+kamillhoff=gdoe.net at nfbnet.org]On Behalf Of
> > John Heim
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 8:18 AM
> > To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
> >
> >
> > Jim, in your zeal to defend the NFB, you responded to all kinds of
>things
> > I
> > never said. Stop treating me like an NFB basher. I am not a troll.
>I have
> > made my points carefully, thoughtfully, and patiently in spite of
>being
> > insulted time and time again. You would like to dismiss me as a
>troll
> > because you don't want to even consider that I might have a valid
>point
> > of
> > view.
> >
> > Back to the argument itself:
> >
> > Of what relevance is it that "I stand on the shoulders" of
>federationists?
> > No one with any sense would deny that the NFB has done a lot of good
> > things
> > and continues to do good things. You won't find a word in anything I
>said
> > that disputes that. But the NFB's policies are inconsistent and
> > contradictory. This is the result of them being based on
>philosophical
> > whims
> > instead of on facts. You say accessible money is no big deal. Okay,
>why
> > not
> > say that about accessible voting machines? Why not say that about
>Target's
> > web site? Accessible money is too expensive? Why not say that about
> > accessible voting machines? If you're concerned about a backlash if
>money
> > is
> > made accessible, why not worry about a backlash if web sites have to
>be
> > made
> > accessible?
> >
> > It's impossible to implement the NFB's philosophy on a consistent
>basis.
> > What's a big deal to you might not be a big deal to me. And as I
>said
> > since
> > my very first message in this particular debate, I wouldn't have a
>problem
> > if the NFB chose to give some issues a higher priority than others.
>If the
> > NFB's position on accessible money was that the ACB could go for
> > accessible
> > money but the NFB is not going to help, I'd be fine with it. But the
>fact
> > is
> > that the very same logic that the NFB has used to come out against
> > accessible money could be applied to everything the NFB does from
> > accessible
> > voting machines, to web sites, to braille books. Maybe we should
>come out
> > against funding for the National Library Service for the blind.
>After all,
> > that's tax payer money being used to remake the world to our liking,
>isn't
> > it? And please do not say it's a matter of degree because that
> > supports*my*
> > point of view. Yes, the only difference between the NLS and
>accessible
> > money
> > is a matter of degree. Which is exactly why the NFB positions on
>these
> > issues should be based on what is best for blind people rather than
>on
> > some
> > vague principle that it violates whenever it decides it's important
> > enough.
> >
> > Your argument is what is known as a false dichotomy. We don't have
>to
> > choose between accessible money and a positive attitude. We can have
>both
> > just as we can have accessible voting machines and a positive
>attitude.
> > Just as we can have the NLS and a positive attitude.
> >
> > And yeah, I have no doubt you and the NFB will continue to "do it
>your
> > way".
> > But that's nothing to be proud of. What the NFB is doing is wrong.
>It's
> > unethical and it's bad for blind people.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jim Marks" <blind.grizzly at gmail.com>
> > To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 11:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
> >
> >
> >> John, I am saying you're shooting at the wrong targets. You seem
>like a
> >> bright enough guy, so I presume you're aim is deliberate. No one
>said
> >> that
> >> accessible money or audible pedestrian signals are the cause of the
> >> prejudice. However, they can be and often are the symptoms of the
> >> prejudice. Spare us the analogies about wheelchair users and
>sighted
> >> people
> >> getting something we poor blind people do not get. Blind people
>know we
> >> have to look to ourselves in the things that count. The way I see
>it,
> >> accessible money doesn't really matter that much, and audible
>pedestrian
> >> signals can be harmful, especially if they are forced on us by
>knotheads
> >> who
> >> don't really believe in the abilities of the blind. You troll here
> >> telling
> >> the most powerful organization of the blind that we are somehow
>cramping
> >> your style. Well, you know what? We're going to do it our way.
>And our
> >> aim is more than just a matter of bravado and twisting of words.
>If you
> >> would simply examine your beliefs and compare them with the ones
>most
> >> Federationists hold, you might learn a thing or two. There was a
>time
> >> when
> >> I thought and acted like you are here on NFB-Talk. I woke up to
>the fact
> >> that there are no real curb cuts for the blind and that no one was
> >> looking
> >> out for the interests of the blind except for those who understand
>the
> >> personal responsibility and positive attitudes bit. You will not
>fix
> >> blindness with accessibility alone. Plus, the more you believe in
>the
> >> abilities of the blind, the less accessibility you will want.
> >>
> >> John, I have one last something to tell you. If you don't want to
>know,
> >> don't look down. If you were to look down, you would see that you
>are
> >> standing on the shoulders of Federationists. We're going to be
>there for
> >> you regardless of how you spit, fuss, and shake your tiny fists.
>Best to
> >> you. I really mean it.
> >>
> >>
> >> -------
> >> Jim Marks
> >> blind.grizzly at gmail.com
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: nfb-talk-bounces+blind.grizzly=gmail.com at nfbnet.org
> >> [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces+blind.grizzly=gmail.com at nfbnet.org] On
>Behalf Of
> >> John G. Heim
> >> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 7:32 PM
> >> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> >> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> Holy cow! We don't *HAVE* accessible money. To suggest that this
>guy's
> >> attitude is the result of accessible money or audible walk signals
>is
> >> ridiculous.
> >>
> >> If someone already thinks blind people can't do anything, how in
>the
> >> world
> >> are you going to convince him otherwise if you can't even tell your
>own
> >> money apart?
> >>
> >> Man, this is ridiculous. I've never seen such a series of absurd
> >> rationalizations in my life.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/jheim%40math.wisc.edu
> >>
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/kamillhoff%40gdoe.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/jheim%40math.wisc.edu
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/dandrews%40visi.com
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG.
>Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 269.23.16/1432 - Release Date:
>5/14/2008 7:49 AM
More information about the nfb-talk
mailing list