[sk0g]

If anything, there's, from my experience, a good overlap between the SJW types, and the people who push for accessibility/ a11y as the cool kids call it, as it sorta falls under the inclusion initiatives.

EDIT: I was clearly disagreeing with the parent badmouthing SJWs wrt accessibility...

[magicalist]

> there's, from my experience, a good overlap between the SJW types, and the people who push for accessibility/ a11y as the coop kids call it

"Pushing for accessibility" is a pejorative now? What in the world is going on in this thread?

[Spivak]

No, you’re just assuming it is because it’s next to the word SWJ.

The parent's point is that someone who would self-identify or otherwise be described as SWJ would more likely push for greater accessibility to a fault rather than reduce it for aesthetic reasons. The attack on “SJWs” in the grandparent is misguided because it misunderstands their motivations so completely that it’s clear that the term is just meant as “people I vaguely don’t like and I feel have it out for me somehow.”

[sk0g]

Thanks, at least someone got me! I was trying to call out randomly blaming people who, if anything, would be on their side, but it seems like most people misunderstood me.

[sk0g]

I never said it was? I said if anything the SJWs they are blaming would be on their side, so it's a weird dig to make.

[ryanbrunner]

Sure (I'm not sure that Venn diagram is a perfect overlap, but whatever), but AMP is bad for reasons other than accessibility.

[sk0g]

AMP is just _bad_, IMO. Content regularly is broken till you visit the actual site, sites don't follow my dark mode preferences, and interactive elements don't translate that well sometimes.

It feels like someone printed out a website to a PDF and decided that was good enough to serve!