Secondly: even IF an accessibility feature is objectively expensive (many are not and you still don‘t create them...why? Hm? HM?!), it still doesn‘t matter. Accessibility is not an optional luxury feature you get to pick and choose whether to include. It‘s a basic necessity.
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
As long as society continues accepting bogus excuses based on declaring disability needs secondary, inaccessibility will continue to exist. Accessibility is a priority need. Not a luxury. Not optional. Not secondary. Do it, or move out of the way and let someone else do it.
Prikaži ovu nit -
„Adding an elevator to all rental buildings is expensive!“ And? Walls? Roofs? Windows? Floors? Electric wiring? Plumbing? All expensive. You still put them in because they‘re basic necessities. So is the elevator. YOU just don‘t think so. That‘s called
#ableism, don‘t do it.Prikaži ovu nit -
It literally doesn‘t matter which excuse you come up with to try and justify inaccessibility. They are all invalid. Accessibility is a human right. Accessibility is a basic necessity. Ableism is unacceptable. So is inaccessibility.
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
It wouldn't cost so much if money were put into making designs for more universally accessible buildings. After research, cost goes down. Not putting money into the research and considering it a waste means when you eventually become disabled (God willing) your world is snaller
-
if they designed it right the first time, they wouldn't have to retrofit everything
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
It is. (Found this out outting on my first event
) But it's an upfront investment that pays off in the long run.
Of course being lazy is cheap up front, but you'll see the issues later on.Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.