3 ms·

> But they should be faulted so they can correct the fault and do better next time. I don't understand the point you're trying to make. They're clearly trying

> But they should be faulted so they can correct the fault and do better next time. I don't understand the point you're trying to make. They're clearly trying to do better as this is a fairly novel approach. Is it perfect? No. But I'm puzzled by the weirdly negative and aggressive reaction this is getting. Deaf people are often neglected and forgotten about. My partner's father is deaf and when he visits government services, had medical appointments, etc., they almost never provide an interpreter — despite it being a legal requirement he requests in advance which is fully subsidized — because they assume that writing stuff down on paper or making vague gestures is adequate. If awareness and accessibility for deaf people is this bad in a major Canadian metropolitan area, imagine how bad it is in smaller areas and countries.

prepend 4y ago
My point is that there are accessibility standards. If a site doesn’t follow them and instead does something else, even with good intentions, that should be pointed out so they do better next time. I don’t think I feel terribly negative other than if the goal is to accommodate dead people then the site made a poor decision that whirl accommodating some dead people made it harder for other people who need different accessibilities. I don’t think the issue is awareness so much as accommodation. I think resources are better spent on solving the problems that can be solved rather than raising awareness.
- richbell 4y ago
  > I don’t think the issue is awareness so much as accommodation. I think resources are better spent on solving the problems that can be solved rather than raising awareness. This is a false dichotomy: we can do both. And I respectfully disagree about the issue not being awareness. The comments on this post itself demonstrates the lack of awareness and understanding about deaf people's experience.

prepend 4y ago

My point is that there are accessibility standards. If a site doesn’t follow them and instead does something else, even with good intentions, that should be pointed out so they do better next time. I don’t think I feel terribly negative other than if the goal is to accommodate dead people then the site made a poor decision that whirl accommodating some dead people made it harder for other people who need different accessibilities. I don’t think the issue is awareness so much as accommodation. I think resources are better spent on solving the problems that can be solved rather than raising awareness.

richbell 4y ago
> I don’t think the issue is awareness so much as accommodation. I think resources are better spent on solving the problems that can be solved rather than raising awareness. This is a false dichotomy: we can do both. And I respectfully disagree about the issue not being awareness. The comments on this post itself demonstrates the lack of awareness and understanding about deaf people's experience.