Wow. Entirely unsurprising, but no less disappointing or infuriating.
It is sad that the only time they are going to do something for disabled people is when they need to profit from them. They did nothing for them all this time; they were forced to use third party applications.
That’s basically capitalism in a nutshell. Unless it is profitable it is not worth doing so throw the kids in the mines, rip down all the forests, harvest all the fish, and fuck those who aren’t profitable.
On a side note this is why it’s rude to call it Asperger’s Syndrome as the person it is named after argued for the nazis to kill their autistic children because they were just a burden on their parents and society as a whole.
Can’t wait for the ADA lawsuit to hit.
Those lawyers are probably itching to start.
I was about the question how the ADA would apply to websites but then I bothered to check. I am surprised at how broadly the DoJ applies the “businesses open to the public” definition.
I think this is a good thing but I wonder at what threshold do they enforce this. If I decide to self-host some wiki on the most esoteric lore behind the game of Lemmings for my audience of six people, can I be fined and/or forced to shut down because my website doesn’t adhere to the ADA guidelines for website accessibility? Because I’m an untalented hack who can barely stand up an instance of WordPress I am not allowed to publicly present anything on the internet?
I’m sure there is nuance to this but I couldn’t find it. I’m not being hyperbolic either, I’m genuinely curious. I feel like this is the cops shutting down a 10 year old’s lemonade stand because they don’t have a license or health certificate. (Shaky analogy but you know what I’m driving at.)
A wiki on the esoteric lore of Lemmings isn’t a business.
Not a lawyer, but your six-person site might be protected because it’s so small. There are some laws that have to be enforced no matter how small the violation, but the penalty might be proportional to the size of violation, but there are also laws where the case just gets thrown out if no one is actually harmed. I don’t know which it is in this case, but either way, I suspect no one bothers picking a legal fight super-tiny sites unless they have personal beef with the owner.
Saddest part is that Reddit corporate most likely didn’t even consider the possibility of visually impaired moderators. Probably assumed by default that no one of any importance would have a disability, which is pretty standard for how persons with disabilities are perceived by society in general.
