[pessimizer]

I just happened to be passing by, and have no dog in this fight. I just don't think ugh has one either. He isn't saying what you think he's saying. I've spent weeks of my life fixing accessibility on government websites (which are the worst) and fighting for strict compliance that others thought wasn't worth it.

My opinion is that it's always worth it to be inclusive when it comes to coding. ugh seems to be implying that extramarket forces should be brought to bear to encourage(or force) accessibility if that is a goal that we want to achieve. If you're fighting with us, what are we fighting about?

[Mz]

If you're fighting with us, what are we fighting about?

See, this is where I feel I am being negatively characterized: I don't think I'm fighting with anyone. Again, if there is a fight, why is it people seem to think I am the only one fighting? It takes two to fight. At this point, I strongly suspect the issue is that I publicly admitted I have a serious handicap and people are basically dismissing me as someone being emotional and irrational, which is one of the reasons people often try to hide their handicaps: It's socially stigmatizing and gets them taken less seriously.

I will try to say this one last time and then attempt to shut up (assuming no one jumps up with any new negative characterizations of me as an individual): I believe that in the future, as the current generation of web-savvy folks age, there will be more incentive to work on this issue and be more accommodating of the typically poor eyesight of older people. Right now, there may be seemingly little incentive to do so. No, that doesn't mean it will be perfect. But we aren't talking about "a handful of blind people".

Peace and have a good evening.

[pessimizer]

I don't mean to negatively characterize you as an individual due to your public admission of a serious handicap. I mean to positively characterize ughs comment as adding to the conversation and not being 'who cares about a handful of blind people.' Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Mz]

Well, I don't have some personal issue with ugh and in my exchanges with him (or her, as the case may be) I basically felt it was a failure to communicate/misunderstanding. I think I said that repeatedly. So I remain baffled as to why two different total strangers felt the need to intercede in this exchange and in both cases they sided with ugh rather than taking a more neutral position. (In case that remark is too subtle, that amounts to casting blame on me whether you intended it or not.) It is possible to jump in where you see trouble and be even handed and not blame either side. I have done it many times.

Thank you for your concern about the welfare of the forum but blaming one side in a misunderstanding is usually not the way to build a more civilized atmosphere. It usually just perpetuates the problem.

Peace.

[pessimizer]

I'm not siding with ugh. I don't think he was arguing with you. I find your argument an excellent way to reframe an argument about accessibility into an argument to build a more complete and functional media/communication product. I'll leave it there.