[JadeNB]

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.

[thaumasiotes]

> Proposing something else that disabled people can do (I guess that's who 'them' is?)

I would guess that 'them' refers to nondisabled users, who are the only group mentioned in the headline.

[JadeNB]

> 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.

[thaumasiotes]

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]".