3 ms·

You don’t get to redefine accessibility.

• dghlsakjg 2y ago
  Why do we have to go by your chosen definition?
  • ddingus 2y ago
    You don't. My point simply is far more people than you may currently expect consider actually using something as a meaningful part of access. It is kind of silly to separate the two in this context. However ill advised I may consider it to be, you get to do that. Access to media without use does not make much sense. "Here, hold this DVD for me." Thanks?
    • dghlsakjg 2y ago
      I’m in agreement with you. I was asking the other commenter (what) why he felt free to dismiss your definition on accessibility as a revision, while at the same time asking us to abide by his arbitrarily decided definition as the one true definition. I fully think that accessibility is impossible without freedom to use all possible functionality.
      • ddingus 2y ago
        Ahh. Indeed, thank you. I noted that, but did not ask as you did.
• ddingus 2y ago
  I didn't. Cheers.