[nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
David Andrews
dandrews at visi.com
Wed May 14 21:13:30 CDT 2008
I would agree with you in most instances, but this is a Don
Quixote-type venture at best.
Also, a lot of information about content, importance, etc., can
easily be conveyed visually using color, bolding, font size and
type, location etc. And ... sightlings can grasp it at a
glance. So, they aren't going to abandon it.
Dave
At 08:54 PM 5/14/2008, you wrote:
>Actually, there *is* a rule that results in accessible sites ... but the
>light-dependent either cannot or will not implement it: forget pictures,
>fancy scripts, graphics in motion and so on and so forth -- and force
>people to do what they ought to be doing anyway -- *reading* *text!* I
>maintain that we're not setting up computers for the illiterate or to
>the standard of the least common denominator.
>
>Now i'll put on my fire-resistant suit. :-) :-)
>
>Mike Freeman
>... "It is human nature to think wisely and act foolishly." -- Anatole
>France
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Aaron Cannon
> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 5:48 AM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Mike is totally correct.
>
> I am currently working as an accessibility consultant, and it is
>extremely
> difficult to come up with good rules that we can hand to our designers
>and
> say, "here. Go do this and every time you'll get an accessible site."
> There are no recipes.
>
> The best we can do is teach our designers as much as possible about
> accessibility, hand them a few rules that usually work, and conduct
>expert
> reviews of the finished product. That's not all we're doing, but it
>is a
> reasonably good overview without getting into too many details.
>
> Aaron
>
>
> - --
> Skype: cannona
> MSN/Windows Messenger: cannona at hotmail.com (don't send email to the
>hotmail
> address.)
> - ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Bullis" <mabullis at hotmail.com>
> To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 4:14 AM
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
>
>
> > Yes. It does frustrate me that we can't develop a set of tools that
>will
> > make (in quotes) any given site accessible. It's frankly more of an
>art
> > in
> > some areas than a science. That's a big problem for us. It means
>that
> > there aren't a simple set of rules and standard sets of tools that
>will,
> > without fail, make any given site accessible. Somehow we've got to
>get
> > closer to that because without it we're always going to be
>vulnerable in
> > ways that make me very nervous.
> > Mike B
> >
> > -----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: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 11:54 PM
> > To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] To Be or Not to Be, Irritated
> >
> > 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/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/cannona%40fireantproductions.com
> >
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.959
> Comment: Key available from all major key servers.
>
> iEYEAREDAAYFAkgq4UYACgkQI7J99hVZuJc4DQCgyM0iN1worYFa5x3xhM6qGq4w
> N/AAnR322DeWgUlvg2K6je+7efUnytYj
> =SAoE
> -----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/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