5 ms·

> "It just comes down to the fact that I think it’s disrespectful for someone to be asking questions over a microphone or a speakerphone when individuals are ac

> "It just comes down to the fact that I think it’s disrespectful for someone to be asking questions over a microphone or a speakerphone when individuals are actually taking the time out of their day to come and testify in person," Vos said. I can see going "hey, voice over phone just doesn't work as smoothly" without considering the disability. But of course, that's the point - they get to consider "normal" as not involving the disability. That's, like, the definition of privilege. By framing it in terms of "respect" you just make the matter worse. What was a logistical issue ("voice over phone isn't as smooth, can we improve that?") is now a moral issue of "respect" - which is basically impossible to nail down, and puts everyone on every side of the issue on the defensive.

hestipod 7y ago
I just don't understand how people so heartless and selfish like this exist and are functional. It speaks poorly to society that one can be this way and not shunned. This person thinks their ego and perceived "respect" matters more than anything and a disabled person using accessibility tools is a slight? There is not a single shred of empathy there. It's just inconceivable to me to think like that.
- sundvor 7y ago
  They go all the way to the top in a lot of places, sadly.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- bilbo0s 7y ago
  Just to add some context here from a Wisconsinite, Vos is one of the cheerleaders of our great Foxconn corporate welfare scheme. Also, the guy champions a work release program for prisoners that he takes advantage of personally. Which, to my mind, wasn't so terrible. Until I found out that every one of the prisoners, um, "working", for him was a young female inmate. Wisconsin really is kind of the Florida or Louisiana of the North. The corruption and moral breakdown around here runs deep. Not just the conservatives either, liberals get in on the action too. Just not quite as flagrant. Lotta work to get to normal around here. Lotta work.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- krageon 7y ago
  > There is not a single shred of empathy there. At this point has it not been repeatedly documented that individuals with antisocial personality disorder are well represented in leadership positions?
ip26 7y ago
Vos is talking about members of the public coming to testify in person to their Congress, and saying the people's Congressmen owe it to be present to listen. Didn't sound like it had anything to do with a technical issue.
- ergothus 7y ago
  That's my point. "the people's Congressmen owe it to be present to listen" - Why do they owe it? (more specifically, why is it bad not to?) . Either (1) because if you aren't present the communication is stilted and awkward, meaning the person gets less-quality attention from their rep, or (2) because physical presence is mystically more "respectful". Focusing on 2 instead of 1 misses the point entirely.
SilasX 7y ago
Reminds me of the recent story where Domino's would rather fight a case to the Supreme Court than take rudimentary steps to make their site usable by the blind. (And the reporting site isn't any better.) https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/25/dominos-asks-supreme-court-to-say-disability-protections-dont-apply-online.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/25/dominos-asks-supreme-court-t...
- rolltiide 7y ago
  > In its filing with the top court, the Chamber of Commerce wrote that the Justice Department has provided only “inconsistent, nonbinding, and unaccountable” rules so this is the correct channel to get this done. the court can force the legislature's and the executive branches' hand on providing specific rules - of course alongside permanently invalidate them, or siding with the lower courts whereas private lawsuits just create a hodge podge of case law and settlements that can be conflicting and irreconcilable to comply with until drumroll resolved by the Supreme Court so yeah, fuck the optics - pun intended - and use the remaining path to consensus available
  - henryfjordan 7y ago
    I'd like to know how much Domino's actually did here. Did they actually try but this guy's particular screen reader didn't work or did they do absolutely nothing and throw their hands up? There's a big difference between "we tried our best but the law is ambiguous" and "the law is ambiguous so we didn't try".
    - rolltiide 7y ago
      I honestly don't think it matters since the whole point of this speculation is just to be mad at them for going against a blind man in court I'm totally fine with it being something as simple as wanting to do a trendy React SPA and then getting sued because it wasn't accessible: It doesn't matter if it was a software limitation, their own designer's and management's lack of awareness, their devs, or the ADA ambiguity Its pay this lawsuit or settle with this blind man and the next one, or figure out what the law actually is.

hestipod 7y ago

I just don't understand how people so heartless and selfish like this exist and are functional. It speaks poorly to society that one can be this way and not shunned. This person thinks their ego and perceived "respect" matters more than anything and a disabled person using accessibility tools is a slight? There is not a single shred of empathy there. It's just inconceivable to me to think like that.

sundvor 7y ago
They go all the way to the top in a lot of places, sadly.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
bilbo0s 7y ago
Just to add some context here from a Wisconsinite, Vos is one of the cheerleaders of our great Foxconn corporate welfare scheme. Also, the guy champions a work release program for prisoners that he takes advantage of personally. Which, to my mind, wasn't so terrible. Until I found out that every one of the prisoners, um, "working", for him was a young female inmate. Wisconsin really is kind of the Florida or Louisiana of the North. The corruption and moral breakdown around here runs deep. Not just the conservatives either, liberals get in on the action too. Just not quite as flagrant. Lotta work to get to normal around here. Lotta work.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
krageon 7y ago
> There is not a single shred of empathy there. At this point has it not been repeatedly documented that individuals with antisocial personality disorder are well represented in leadership positions?

ip26 7y ago

Vos is talking about members of the public coming to testify in person to their Congress, and saying the people's Congressmen owe it to be present to listen. Didn't sound like it had anything to do with a technical issue.

ergothus 7y ago
That's my point. "the people's Congressmen owe it to be present to listen" - Why do they owe it? (more specifically, why is it bad not to?) . Either (1) because if you aren't present the communication is stilted and awkward, meaning the person gets less-quality attention from their rep, or (2) because physical presence is mystically more "respectful". Focusing on 2 instead of 1 misses the point entirely.

SilasX 7y ago

Reminds me of the recent story where Domino's would rather fight a case to the Supreme Court than take rudimentary steps to make their site usable by the blind. (And the reporting site isn't any better.) https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/25/dominos-asks-supreme-court-to-say-disability-protections-dont-apply-online.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/25/dominos-asks-supreme-court-t...

rolltiide 7y ago
> In its filing with the top court, the Chamber of Commerce wrote that the Justice Department has provided only “inconsistent, nonbinding, and unaccountable” rules so this is the correct channel to get this done. the court can force the legislature's and the executive branches' hand on providing specific rules - of course alongside permanently invalidate them, or siding with the lower courts whereas private lawsuits just create a hodge podge of case law and settlements that can be conflicting and irreconcilable to comply with until drumroll resolved by the Supreme Court so yeah, fuck the optics - pun intended - and use the remaining path to consensus available
- henryfjordan 7y ago
  I'd like to know how much Domino's actually did here. Did they actually try but this guy's particular screen reader didn't work or did they do absolutely nothing and throw their hands up? There's a big difference between "we tried our best but the law is ambiguous" and "the law is ambiguous so we didn't try".
  - rolltiide 7y ago
    I honestly don't think it matters since the whole point of this speculation is just to be mad at them for going against a blind man in court I'm totally fine with it being something as simple as wanting to do a trendy React SPA and then getting sued because it wasn't accessible: It doesn't matter if it was a software limitation, their own designer's and management's lack of awareness, their devs, or the ADA ambiguity Its pay this lawsuit or settle with this blind man and the next one, or figure out what the law actually is.