[Access-activists] Next Set of Tasks for GAI

[T.V. Raman]

Also, shaming has the effect of the person being shamed becoming
first defensive, and next just doing the bare minimum to pass a
checkbox test --- the user usually gets forgotten in the melee
-- 

-- 


On 7/1/10, Richard Stallman <address@hidden> wrote:
>     Another thing to keep in mind: what is the charter of GNU?  GNU
>     regularly addresses abuse of FLOSS, regularly speaks out against DRM,
>     etc.  But where should GNU come down on a website which may or may not
>     be using FLOSS tools (e.g. Apache), which may or may not support FLOSS
>     user agents (e.g. Firefox), but has a bad accessibility story/support.
>     Should GNU accessibility only speak to accessibility, separate from
>     where an organization stands on FLOSS/freedom support?
>
> This is a good point.  The GNU Project should address accessibility in
> the context of freedom.  If a site uses restrictive interfaces, that
> pressure people to use nonfree software, we want it to change.  But
> access technology is not the only area those sites cause problems.
> For instance, sites cause problems with nonfree Javascript code.  That
> may not impede accessibility, but it is a serious issue for free
> software.
>
> Shaming is not the first step, or even the second step, in approaching
> a site.  The first step is a friendly private request.  The second
> step is asking lots of people to make that same friendly private
> request.
>
>