[nfb-talk] [NFB-talk] Here We GoAgain: Home Makeover-blindcouple in OH

[David Andrews]

John:

It seems to me that you sometimes take what individuals say and act 
like this is official NFB policy.  Just because somebody says it here 
-- it doesn't necessarily mean that this our official policy.  I 
agree that some people may not realize or understand that our 
position has shifted, and is more nuanced than anyone is admitting.

You keep beating us with a nine year old protest -- give it up.

David Andrews

At 08:53 AM 12/10/2010, you wrote:
>I am pretty sure that I never said the NFB was against accessible 
>pedestrian signals in all circumstances.  In fact, I think this only 
>proves my point. When I tell you that the NFB organized protests 
>against the Access Board recommendations on accessible signals and 
>the they said they make blind pedestrians less safe, you heard 
>"against them". But that's not what I said.
>
>I've been trying to make a point about the NFB's position on 
>accessible signals for a couple of years now and I really don't 
>think that its not getting through because of the way I'm putting 
>it. I have 2 very specific complaints with the NFB's position on 
>accessible signals. first is that They organized protests against 
>the Access Board recommendations in 2001. Secondly, they have been 
>saying that accessible signals make blind pedestrians less safe. 
>I've provided links to Braille Monitor articles supporting thos claims.
>
>You can see the effect of these actions as well as I can. There are 
>a lot of myths about audible signals and almost universal opposition 
>to them on this list. If the NFB's position is that it favors 
>accessible signals under certain circumstances, its lost on many of 
>the members of this list.