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

[John G. Heim]

See: http://nfb.org/legacy/bm/bm03/bm0301/bm0301.htm

In 2008, the NFB passed a resolution saying vibrating walk signals were okay 
if that's what you mean. But it renewed its opposition to audible walk 
signals and, even worse, locator signals. It would be difficult to find the 
button for the vibrating signal or even know its there if it had no locator 
sound.

I don't know how anyone can fail to see how illogical the NFB position is. I 
could see the NFB wanting to take a cautious  approach. But if the NFB 
really believe what it was saying, that audible walk signals might make it 
more dangerous for blind pedestrians, why aren't they fighting tooth and 
nail for more research? Why aren't they working *with* the Access Board to 
study the matter first and then going with whatever the research shows?

Could it be that this isn't really about whether or not accessible signals 
make blind pedestrians safer?

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Wm. Ritchhart" <william.ritchhart at sbcglobal.net>
To: "'NFB Talk Mailing List'" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2010 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-talk][NFB-talk] Here We GoAgain: Home Makeover-blindcouple 
in OH


> John,
>
> It has changed.  I have not been attending conventions in the past few
> years.  However I do remember a convention round up and/or resolutions 
> list
> where it did change.
>
> Thanks, William
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
> Behalf Of John Heim
> Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2010 2:05 PM
> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] [NFB-talk] Here We GoAgain: Home
> Makeover-blindcouple in OH
>
> David, I'm not "baiting" you with anything. I'm stating cold, hard
> facts. I would be only too happy if the NFB had changed its position
> on accessible signals. Has it? If you have information in that regard,
> I'd be only too happy to hear it.
>
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2010, at 11:11 PM, David Andrews wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>