This doesn't seem to address the point of the article, which is the (in)validity of the argument "I don't need to/shouldn't implement guidelines that help users with disabilities, because they are ineffective for/hurt users without disabilities." Proposing something else that disabled people can do (I guess that's who 'them' is?) is probably not helpful here, although it could be helpful in a thread looking for tips for disabled users.
> I would guess that 'them' refers to nondisabled users, who are the only group mentioned in the headline.
That's certainly a logical reading, but I have even more trouble interpreting the post that way (but this ambiguity of interpretation is one more reason why drive-by comments—not yours, but the earlier one to which I was responding—are less than helpful). The question isn't whether there's any way to make browsing easier for non-disabled users; it's whether making browsing easier for disabled users makes it harder for non-disabled users (and the answer is no). In that context, it's not clear why one would want to provide advice about the browsing habits of non-disabled users.
As I read it, the question is "do accessibility efforts do anything to help non-disabled users?", and the implied message of the response was "if the non-disabled users switch to vimium and a tiling window manager, then yes [but otherwise probably not]".
Sorry.... I'm not a native speaker. My initial thoughts in the post was about why bother? Vimium and TWM is intended to non-disabled people and I used to use Acceptability to avoid mouse before discovering Vimium. So, it's a fact which Web Acceptability is good to non-disabled, but why push it when Vimium solve it? Anyways, as the first guy replied, although Vimium helps, it lacks.
..but you know what helps more? big buttons I can click with the eye tracker! not hidden in modals that vanish when I move the mouse away!