3 ms·

For the visually impaired, it's not "difficult" to use, it's closer to "impossible" to use. By toning back the language, you've made it sound like whining and

For the visually impaired, it's not "difficult" to use, it's closer to "impossible" to use. By toning back the language, you've made it sound like whining and not a legitimate concern. You make it easy to ignore.

dahfizz 6y ago
"X elements are impossible for me to see because of Y condition" is a perfectly legitimate piece of feedback. "X element being the wrong color is causing catastrophic harm" is insane feedback. By using silly language, they are making themselves easy to ignore.
- tobr 6y ago
  “Catastrophic harm” is a phrase you came up with. It’s fair to phrase accessibility concerns in terms of harm, because being denied access to something other people can use is a type of harm. “Catastrophic” is very common hyperbole for something you think is highly unfortunate.
  - ry4nolson 6y ago
    first paragraph of the article: >These are catastrophic design failures for the new UX, and directly harms both end-users due to eye-strain, and directly harms visually impaired individuals due to lack of visual clarity. It makes the app less accessible, and is not only visually displeasing, but actively ableist in nature.
    - tobr 6y ago
      Yes, what are we supposed to take from this quote as a reply in this context?
  - dataduck 6y ago
    > Speaking of 0 evidence, I’d like to stick a [citation needed] on this: > being denied access to something other people can use is a type of harm
    - tobr 6y ago
      What do you want a citation for? That being prevented from being an equal participant in society is negative?
thatguy0900 6y ago
I think it's easier to ignore when it comes across as typical internet flame war hysteria rather than someone trying to have a conversation about a issue
- BitwiseFool 6y ago
  I'd like to think that, but this kind of rhetoric is becoming more and more common. People will utilize wild hyperbole, stretch the meaning of words, and declare that people are being harmed or oppressed as a call to action. I mean, at the end of the day this is about a user interface on a messaging app. But the post makes it sound like there is some willful negligence that borders on criminality. But in a twisted way, maybe this kind of argument works. We are talking about it after-all.
corobo 6y ago
It's on public feature request software it's already easy to ignore
no-dr-onboard 6y ago
By that logic, everyone should use caps and shout. Ad absurdum.

dahfizz 6y ago

"X elements are impossible for me to see because of Y condition" is a perfectly legitimate piece of feedback. "X element being the wrong color is causing catastrophic harm" is insane feedback. By using silly language, they are making themselves easy to ignore.

tobr 6y ago
“Catastrophic harm” is a phrase you came up with. It’s fair to phrase accessibility concerns in terms of harm, because being denied access to something other people can use is a type of harm. “Catastrophic” is very common hyperbole for something you think is highly unfortunate.
- ry4nolson 6y ago
  first paragraph of the article: >These are catastrophic design failures for the new UX, and directly harms both end-users due to eye-strain, and directly harms visually impaired individuals due to lack of visual clarity. It makes the app less accessible, and is not only visually displeasing, but actively ableist in nature.
  - tobr 6y ago
    Yes, what are we supposed to take from this quote as a reply in this context?
- dataduck 6y ago
  > Speaking of 0 evidence, I’d like to stick a [citation needed] on this: > being denied access to something other people can use is a type of harm
  - tobr 6y ago
    What do you want a citation for? That being prevented from being an equal participant in society is negative?

thatguy0900 6y ago

I think it's easier to ignore when it comes across as typical internet flame war hysteria rather than someone trying to have a conversation about a issue

BitwiseFool 6y ago
I'd like to think that, but this kind of rhetoric is becoming more and more common. People will utilize wild hyperbole, stretch the meaning of words, and declare that people are being harmed or oppressed as a call to action. I mean, at the end of the day this is about a user interface on a messaging app. But the post makes it sound like there is some willful negligence that borders on criminality. But in a twisted way, maybe this kind of argument works. We are talking about it after-all.

corobo 6y ago

It's on public feature request software it's already easy to ignore

no-dr-onboard 6y ago

By that logic, everyone should use caps and shout. Ad absurdum.