X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Approved-By:  Bill McGarry <wtm@SHELDEV.SHEL.ISC-BR.COM>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.l-hcap
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 08:15:07 EDT
Reply-To:     Bill McGarry <wtm@sheldev.shel.isc-br.com>
From:         Bill McGarry <wtm@sheldev.shel.isc-br.com>
Subject:      Handicap Digest # 2913
X-To:         LHCAP <l-hcap@VM1.NODAK.EDU>

                             THE HANDICAP DIGEST

                                 Issue # 2913

                        Wednesday, September 02, 1992

Today's Topics:


                                ******

                           Blink Talk Digest # 704

                    Voice Output on PC tied to MainFrame
                         Accent synthesizer question
                     Re: window bridge and syntha-voice
                            Nfb Bbs Censorship??
                               Re: Nls And Nfb
                             Re: "Blind Loyalty"
                              Re: Screen Reader
                                    Asap
                               Re: Nls And nfb
                                Acb/Nfb Feud


                                ******


To subscribe to the Handicap Digest mailing list or have your
thoughts in the next issue, please send electronic mail to
Bill McGarry at any of the following addresses:


UUCP:       uunet!bunker!wtm
INTERNET:   wtm@bunker.shel.isc-br.com
BITNET:     l-hcap@ndsuvm1.bitnet
Fidonet:    The Handicap News BBS (141/420)   1-203-337-1607
	    (300/1200/2400 baud, 24 hours)
Compuserve: 73170,1064

                              Bill McGarry (Moderator)
                              (203) 337-1518



------



Subject: Voice Output on PC tied to MainFrame
From: David.Tanner@f168.n129.z1.fidonet.org (David Tanner)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:129/168 - Braille Bank BBS, Pittsburgh PA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

In an article of <11 Aug 92  15:07:16>, shats@ecst.csuchico.edu
(Mick Shatswell) writes:

 >I am trying to get some information on voice output on a PC
 >tied to a mainframe.  It was suggested to us to try McErma(sp?).
 >Does anyone have any information re either McErma or any others?
 >We are using a 3270 coax and are open to any board with a screen
 >reader.  We are curretnly using DecTalk with multi voice.  We tried
 >Attachmats 3270 with VocalEyes without the needed results.
 >
 >I would appreciate any help with this problem.  How do we do this?
 >What board do we use?  Which software do we need?
 >
 >Please reply to me directly.  Thank you for your help.
 >
 >Mick Shatswell  - Technology for Independence
 >

That can be a difficult interface depending on what you need to
emulate, but the products which seem to be most often used are
Artic Business Vision from Artic Technologies at Troy Michigan,
Vert Plus from Telesensory Systems Inc. at Mountain View
California, and Job Access With Speech from Henter-Joyce Inc. at
St. Petersberg Florida.  I would suggest you call each place and
speak directly with their support people to determine whether their
system and your emulation can be made to work effectively with
their product.  The phone numbers for Telesensory and Henter-Joyce
are:

        Telesensory Systems Inc.  (800) 227-8418
        Henter-Joyce (813) 576-5658

Sorry I don't have the number for Artic Technologies handy, but if
you can't find their number through directory assistance you could
call C Tech Corp. in Pearl River New York as they are an Artic
dealor and can provide assistance or give you the number for Artic
Technologies.  C Tech Corp. (914) 735-7907.

There may be other products that will do the job in your
environment, but without knowing the particulars I would suggest
that these three seem to be the most widely used.  You may also
wish to check with Telesensory Systems Inc. as to whether IBM
Screen Reader could be used in this situation.  This software
should work in your environment, but the learning curve for
learning the software may be longer and require more customization
by yourself.

        D. T.

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!168!David.Tanner
Internet: David.Tanner@f168.n129.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Accent synthesizer question
From: David.Tanner@f168.n129.z1.fidonet.org (David Tanner)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:129/168 - Braille Bank BBS, Pittsburgh PA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

In an article of <11 Aug 92  15:41:24>, nff2355@dsacg2.dsac.dla.mil (Dale
 Pennington) writes:
 >For the past two years I have been using a Soundingboard.  I have
 >become spoiled to its ease of use, especially being able to change
 >the rate and volume on the numberpad.  Now I have an Accent.
 >
 >Could anyone tell me if there is any software available to change
 >rate, pitch, volume, etc on the Accent.  It would be especially
 >nice if such software could be made DOS resident.

What speech software are you using?  Virtually every speech
software that supports the Accent synthesizers also support
adjusting each of the features that you mentioned above.  I am
using an Accent SA as I write this message to you with the speech
software TinyTalk.  This speech software supports all the features
you mention above and a full line of advanced screen reading
options at the extreemly reasonable price of $75.00  All of these
features can be easily controlled from the software's review mode
using the function keys in combination with the alt, control, or
shift keys.  Since the controling of these features are done in the
software's review mode they do not interfer with operation of your
application software when you are in interactive mode.

        D. T.

P.S. If your speech software does not support these features or you
are not sure you may feel free to call me and I can attempt to help
you with your present software or assist you in setting up the
software I am using here with your Accent. Weekdays (412) 221-2200
(evenings and weekends) 412 655-0257.  The shareware speech
software "TinyTalk version 1.20 is available for download here 23
hours per day as TTALK120.ZIP and TTCONF.ZIP.

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!168!David.Tanner
Internet: David.Tanner@f168.n129.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Re: window bridge and syntha-voice
From: Paul.Nobrega@p0.f266.n163.z1.fidonet.org (Paul Nobrega)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:163/266.0 - Vision, Ottawa ON


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

interesting comment jim; as far as i am concern, wether a person is paid
or not, he still has a reputation to maintain for at one point, his
articles won't have any value and won't be read.  the best
recommendations still come from those using the product. let's wait and
see what kind of feedback window bridge users will generate. one must
rely on something and the beginning point i think, is to have an open
mind and not condem things automaticly. best regards,
paul

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!163!266.0!Paul.Nobrega
Internet: Paul.Nobrega@p0.f266.n163.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Nfb Bbs Censorship??
From: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Mike Freeman)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/126 - Lawson & Reay, Vancouver WA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

Hello, Steve.

Thank you very much for a calm, sober-minded, well-reasoned post (the
one I am responding to here).  I truly appreciate reasoned dialogue of
the caliber you evince in this message.  You raise valid questions and I
shall endeavor to comment upon them in the spirit of reason in which you
made them.

In a message to Mike Freeman <01 Aug 92 02:51> Steve Richards wrote:

 SR> Quoting Mike Freeman to Steve Richards 21 Jul 92 21:41:08

 > MF> I'd agree with that.  However, he
 > MF> was/is a convenient focus for
 > MF> vitriole  and symbol for the issues
 > MF> which NFB has chosen to take stands
 > MF> on.

 SR> Hi Mike, yes, that's true.  Indeed any
 SR> highly visible person is a target
 SR> for attacks.  Let me say that I am not
 SR> a rabid Kenneth Jernigan hater.
 SR> To be such I would have to know him
 SR> personally, and I don't.  Neither do
 SR> I know for certain whether he should
 SR> wear a martyr's crown or a devil's
 SR> horns, but it is a question which I
 SR> would like to answer to *my*
 SR> satisfaction to *my* standards of
 SR> accuracy.  I'm not at all sure I can
 SR> do that, for emotions run high on both
 SR> sides of the fence and often
 SR> anyone trying to get at the truth of
 SR> who and what the man is finds
 SR> himself caught in cross-fire.  But it
 SR> does seem to me that not every
 SR> attack on Kenneth Jernigan can come
 SR> from irresponsible, spiteful,
 SR> vengeful people; the odds are against
 SR> that.  So if some of those
 SR> attacking him are responsible and not
 SR> spiteful and not vengeful, why are
 SR> they doing it?  Are they without just
 SR> cause?  Possibly.  But not, in my
 SR> mind, definitely.

Your points are well-taken.  First, I would say that Dr. Jernigan ought
not to be regarded as either a martyr or a person wearing devils' horns.
He is a man who, as President of the Federation for many years and as
the appointed Executive Director of the Federation under President
Maurer, was and is charged with articulating and carrying out NFB
policies as determined at the NFB national convention through
resolutions or by a reasonable extrapolation therefrom.  To my mind, he
is a colleague in the Federation whose opinions I value (but do not
always share) and whom I respect.  To me, however, as one of our
prominent spokespersons, he is due no particular adulation.  I know that
some will not believe it but I am not at all sure he really wants
adulation; anyone who blindly follows one individual can be swayed to
follow another with equal unthinking steadfastness.

Of course, Dr. Jernigan is other things to other people.  I did not go
to the Iowa Commission for the blind when he was its director; hence I
do not look upon him as a saviour in any sense of the word.  But, as a
good rehab man (and, IMHO, he was superb), those whom he brought out of
the depths of despair and whom he convinced that they could lead normal
lives and whom he gave the courage to do so legitimately see him as
something approaching, if not a saviour or a saint, at least a
benefactor.

Those who have been (either in the Federation or on the outside) in a
political tangle with him will see him in another light, of course.
Indeed, as a Federation spokesperson, as I said in my post previous to
this, enmity toward him was almost guaranteed.

Make no mistake:  Dr. Jernigan has made his share of errors as have the
rest of us.  In what people say about an individual, as you say, if
something persists, there *may* be a grain of truth.  However, consider
this:  those on the losing end of a political battle are bound to
perceive things differently from those who have won.  I only ask that,
in evaluating comments about Jernigan or the NFB, we all take
considerations of this sort into account and try to acknowledge that
things may not be as they seem.  To your credit, you do this, so my
comments are not aimed at you.

 > MF> That calls into question whether and
 > MF> to what extent one believes in
 > MF> democracy or the right of the people
 > MF> to choose whom they will.  To say
 > MF> that terms of office should be
 > MF> limited (in private organizations or in
 > MF> public office) is, in the end, to
 > MF> say that the public cannot be
 > MF> trusted  to make wise decisions
 > MF> (and, hence, that some artificial

 SR> Actually, no, sometimes the public
 SR> can't be trusted to make the right
 SR> decision, or else someone like Hitler
 SR> would never come to power.  Our
 SR> constitution has delays built into it
 SR> for the very reason that our
 SR> forefathers understood that sometimes
 SR> the public becomes emotional and
 SR> behaves like an unruly mob.  We have
 SR> laws to protect ourselves from
 SR> ourselves, and if we did not some who
 SR> hang politicians in effigy would
 SR> hang them in actuality, themselves
 SR> becoming more criminal than those
 SR> whom they detest.  Which says what?  I
 SR> don't know.  You see, Mike, I do
 SR> my darnedest to see both sides of an
 SR> issue, even when that leaves me
 SR> more confused than ever.  The sad
 SR> truth is that many cannot bring
 SR> themselves to do this, which is why
 SR> democracy is the rule of people
 SR> collectively, rational and irrational
 SR> ones, so that hopefully something
 SR> like sense will be the ultimate result.

Indeed, that is the article of faith from which we who believe in
democracy proceed and which is the wellspring of our representative
government and our democratic traditions.

You are absolutely correct; the Founding Fathers, while wishing to
enfranchise the people, in the end, for the most part, distrusted the
people, at least in the sense that they felt it necessary to put in
mediating institutions (for example, the Senate) to moderate the rule of
the rabble (in the House of Representatives).  There were, of course,
exceptions.  Madison and Wilson both thought that the people could be
trusted to rule, in effect, as closely to directly as possible.  Wilson
always maintained that, rather than their being a balance of separate
powers, the Constitution gave Congress the supreme authority.  We argue
about this still (Watergae and Irangate, anyone?).  But I digress.

The question which we face is this:  to what extent should we, the
people, in both government and private organizations, get the government
we wish and/or deserve and to what extent should we be safeguarded by
legal provisions from our own folly.  Although I think the Founding
Fathers were wise to put in checks and balances, I basically think that
the people should be allowed to get the government they choose.  This
is, however, a matter of debate, as you indicate.

 SR> Since I possess emotions, I too am
 SR> capable of knee-jerk reactions when
 SR> something pulls my own personal chain,
 SR> though I try to recognize it and
 SR> get past it to rational analysis.  Uh, well, I try.

The present post amply demonstrates this.

 SR> Yep, the people in NFB have every
 SR> right to pick who will lead them.  So
 SR> did the ancient Hebrews, but they
 SR> didn't always pick wisely.  Still,
 SR> they wanted a king to rule them, and
 SR> that's what they got.  Now that
 SR> I've argued myself in a circle, the
 SR> danger of playing one's own devil's
 SR> advocate, I'll say this:  My question
 SR> about whether anyone should be
 SR> allowed to remain in power perpetually
 SR> was inspired by this thought:
 SR> Limiting terms of office and such may
 SR> very well cheat us of the
 SR> continued leadership of good people
 SR> who wouldn't be corrupted by their
 SR> power, but it also protects us from
 SR> tyrants who would be.  And even
 SR> worthwhile dreams must alter with the
 SR> changing times.  Or at least grow.
 SR> Hence my thoughts about change and new
 SR> leadership.  A batch of new young
 SR> people following the same old leader
 SR> isn't the same thing as new
 SR> thinkers, not necessarily.  Are they
 SR> making their own dreams or
 SR> following someone else's?  Yes, I can
 SR> see the other side; maybe the
 SR> dream's *worth* following.  That's
 SR> what I'm trying to find out.  And if
 SR> it is not...

You've put your finger on the heart of the matter, I believe.  Most of
us, young and old, who are active in the Federation, consider the dream
worth following.  There are many, of course, who do not think so; they
have their own organization(s).  This is as it should be.

That said, however, I think that the foregoing discussion ignores a
fallacy which is assumed by most of the Jernigan-haters who make their
views known on this echo and elsewhere.  That fallacy is that somehow we
in the NFB have no choice but to follow Dr. Jernigan blindly and that he
has some sort of mesmeric hold upon us which is nearly impossible to
break.  One thinks of the religious cults such as that of the Moonies
and the "de-programmers" of whom one heard in the late 1970's.  Indeed,
I heard a teacher say to a blind student who had recently discovered the
NFB, that he (the student) should be de-programmed.  This view is not
aided by the practice of the NFB of not disclosing to the public
internal debates once a policy has been made.  Thus, the advantages of
having known, predictable policies at all levels of the Federation are
accompanied by the disadvantage of giving the impression to those who do
not have the time or the inclination to investigate the matter
thoroughly for themselves that NFB members are somehow under the spell
and demagogic influence of Dr. Jernigan.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.  Although few would believe it,
Dr. Jernigan is now an appointed official; he was an elected official
prior to Mr. Maurer's election to the Presidency in 1986.  As such, if
he failed/fails to carry out NFB policies to the satisfaction of the
rank-and-file, he could have been/still can be thrown out or fired.  To
be sure, he has much political influence and prestige and, like all
political leaders, will endeavor to see that policies of his liking are
adopted by the organization.  That's natural; we all would do the same
were we in his shoes.

But believe me, Dr. Jernigan is not indispensible.  Indeed, he stepped
aside as President in order not to remain in office so long that he
would grow senile therein while the troops would be reluctant to get rid
of him.

Also, even with long-time leaders, if they are not responsive to changes
in circumstances and policy, they will not last.  Dr. Jernigan and, more
importantly at this juncture, Mr. Maurer, *are* responsive to the wishes
of the rank-and-file.  It must be remembered that Mr. Maurer is of my
generation -- the first RLF wave.  We're in power now.

I shall give one further illustration of the lack of merit in the
Jernigan-as-dictator or Jernigan-as-brainwasher thesis and then have
done for a while.  I think people are becoming somewhat weary of my long
missives.  (BTW, to the tired and weary, I say this:  cease irrational
NFB-bashing and I'll cease responding in kind; keep it up and I'll
continue to argue NFB's case {grin}).  But back to the matter at hand.
The idea for our Braille bills in the various states did not, in the
end, come from President Maurer or Dr. Jernigan.  the NFB of Maryland
had introduced an early Braille into the state legislator in 1986 or
early 1987; it did not pass.  That was a state affiliate initiative and
there was no national policy re Braille literacy bills.  It was a 1987
resolution that made it NFB policy to seek enactment, state by state, of
bills to see that blind children had the right and opportunity to
receive instruction in Braille.  The implementing resolution was not
brought by Dr. Jernigan.  Nor was it brought by the Board of Directors.
No, it was brought by a man named Maurice Mines, who was a student at
the Washington State School for the Blind at the time and whose
imagination was fired by the possibility of legislating a solution to
the Braille literacy problem.

In the end, I feel, the best way to find out about NFB is to attend a
national convention and judge for oneself to what extent we're
bamboozled and to what extent we think for ourselves.

Steve, I really appreciate our rational discourse on this subject; I
really mean that.  We haven't thrown brickbats and have kept the
inflammatory rhetoric out of it.  That's as it should be and I commend
you for it.

Take care.

Cordially,

Mike Freeman < K 7 U I J >
... *The National Federation of the Blind is changing what it means to be
 blind.*
___ CRR QWK 1.40

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!126!Mike.Freeman
Internet: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Re: Nls And Nfb
From: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Mike Freeman)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/126 - Lawson & Reay, Vancouver WA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

In a message to Warren Figueiredo <30 Jul 92 19:38> Dan Kysor wrote:

 DK> i would like to see more books that
 DK> are present in books stores and not
 DK> those titles present on old dusty shelves.

Hi, Dan.

On the contrary, I would like to see *less* stuff from bookstores
recorded/Brailled and **more** stuff from old dusty bookshelves.  While
I admit there are a number of fascinating titles coming out at Walden
Books or the other stores (and one can wander for years thru the
catacombs of Powell's Bookstore in Portland, oregon, the largest
bookstore in the world), it is my opinion that most of the stuff
currently written (and recorded/Brailled, for that matter) is sheer
crap.

Oh, well!  Guess we make NLS's life difficult, if interesting {grin}.

Cheers!

Mike Freeman
___ CRR QWK 1.40

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!126!Mike.Freeman
Internet: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Re: "Blind Loyalty"
From: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Mike Freeman)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/126 - Lawson & Reay, Vancouver WA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

In a message to Jamal Mazrui <30 Jul 92 10:33> Darrell Shandrow wrote:

 DS> all democratic organizations   have the same problems
 DS> concerning outside activities.   what i mean is that mike
 DS> is right in not going into detail about the issues he
 DS> disagrees with.   all organizations tend to look down on
 DS> members who openly share discenting viewpoints outside that
 DS> organization.   don't tell me that acb doesn't have this
 DS> problem too as i'm sure it could be found.

Hi, Darrell!

You are right; other organizations take umbrage at criticism of their
policies by members outside the forum of theose organizations.
Sometimes the measures they take are far more draconian than any the NFB
ever has done.

A fine example -- one I've mentioned before but it appears not to have
been noticed -- is that of the NAACP and its action toward a California
chapter that openly criticized NAACP's anti-Thomas stand last fall.
*****One day***** after the local chapter made public its dissenting,
pro-Thomas stance, they got the word from NAACP National Headquarters
that they should rescind their statement or face expulsion from NAACP.
Wow!  You don't have to believe me.  Look it up in _U.S. News and World
Report_.  Ultimately, the chapter was not expelled (I think, but do not
remember for certain, that they withdrew their statement); however, this
should put to rest the presumption that NFB is unique in its policies
and/or that it isn't democratic because it demands a certain discipline
from its members concerning statements they make outside NFB concerning
NFB or its policies.  I have not heard anyone lately accuse NAACP of
being an undemocratic organization or that Benjamin Hooks is a dictator
or that NAACP has become a cult of personality {grin}.

At the risk of angering ACB members (who can and will speak for
themselves), I'd say, Darrell, that ACB has made the conscious decision
that they'd rather risk ineffectiveness as an organization than demand
discipline from its members in publicly stating anti-ACB opinions in
forums outside ACB.  I recall reading something to that effect in the
Forum last summer (the article dealt with how to handle credentials of
convention delegates more justly).

Take care ES 73!

NU7I DE K7UIJ
... *The National Federation of the Blind is changing what it means to be
 blind.*
___ CRR QWK 1.40

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!126!Mike.Freeman
Internet: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Re: Screen Reader
From: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Mike Freeman)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/126 - Lawson & Reay, Vancouver WA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

In a message to Gary Petraccaro <29 Jul 92 22:35> David Tanner wrote:

 DT> I have no desire to leave the impression that users
 DT> know what is always best for them when it comes to computer
 DT> software, and blind users of access technology don't have
 DT> any particular magic that make them better judges of what
 DT> is good speech software and what is not.

Hello, David!

I can certainly echo that sentiment.  As a Systems Programmaer on Vax
mainframes with the Bonneville Power Administration, I can certainly
testify to the fact that Users often don't know what the heck they want
and they end up telling you what they *really* wanted the third time
around rather than thinking out what they wanted/needed before the
programming process starts.  In their defense, though, they often do not
know what is possible.  I would expect that these same problems occur re
design of speech-access software.

 DT> My hope is that IBM will come up with
 DT> a product for OS2 that is so
 DT> easy to use, so user friendly, and provides such complete
 DT> access to OS2 and Windows that we will truly feel that the
 DT> speech software has become transparent to our use of a
 DT> computer.  Unfortunantly, their present attempt comes no
 DT> where close to doing any of the above, and is one of the
 DT> most difficult speech software products I have used with MS
 DT> DOS.  It is almost imposible to set it up for DOS use
 DT> without getting some wierd problems that you won't
 DT> experience with other speech packages selling for one
 DT> eighth the price of Screen Reader.

I cannot personally comment upon IBM Screen Reader, either for DOS or
OS/2, as I have not used it/them.  However, I have heard the criticisms
you level at it from others.

My purpose is not to comment on this but rather to opine that I doubt
there ever will be a package that is *completely* transparent to the
user.  For one thing, different users seem to want different things
spoken.  For another, vendors of applications software seem to
continually come up with fancier and fancier doodles and methods of
information presentation that the purveyors of speech-access software
(or Braille-access software, for that matter) must deal with.  They'll
always be a step and a half behind.

Perhaps the standard Windows environment will change this; I have my
doubts.

Cheers!

Mike Freeman
___ CRR QWK 1.40

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!126!Mike.Freeman
Internet: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Asap
From: Carol.Ashland@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Carol Ashland)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/56 - The Overworked Drag, Portland OR


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

I have been learning ASAP at work.  It is a speech program put out by
MicroTalk,  and is quite good, from what I can tell so far.  It even works
happily with our network and the complicated programs it contains.  I am
very impressed with it so far.  I am using a DoubleTalk with it.  Any
comments from anyone else out there about it?  Good points?  Criticisms?

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!56!Carol.Ashland
Internet: Carol.Ashland@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Re: Nls And nfb
From: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Mike Freeman)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/126 - Lawson & Reay, Vancouver WA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

Hi, Carol!

In a message to Mike Freeman <08 Aug 92 00:03> Carol Ashland wrote:

 CA> Have you really written letters or made phone calls to NLS
 CA> about their moronic selection policies?  I never have.

I've talked to Mr. Cylcke several times about it; in fairness to him, he
says, and he is quite right, that there actually is quite a bit of
demand for the romances, Steven King novels, etc. etc.  There are
getting to be more of us old-fashioned literary types, though, and I
think that the tide *may* be turning.

I have not written to NLS, though, and that would be a good idea.  Nor
have I talked to, say, Judy Dixon or other NLS staff about this (also
that would be a good idea).  The short answer, then, is that I've done
some moaning and groaning and this has been acknowledged but I have not
done nearly as much as I *could* do about it.

Guess that makes me human, huh? {grin}

Mike Freeman
... ** Courtroom, n.:  The place where justice is dispensed with. **
___ CRR QWK 1.40

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!126!Mike.Freeman
Internet: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org




------



Subject: Acb/Nfb Feud
From: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Mike Freeman)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:105/126 - Lawson & Reay, Vancouver WA


[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

In a message to Isaac Obie <05 Aug 92 13:01> Chris Bazzie wrote:

 CB> I would think that the government or
 CB> other agencies would supply
 CB> equipment like that free of charge, or
 CB> at least as cheaply as possible.
 CB> Everyone deserves an opportunity to
 CB> communicate in any way they want to
 CB> or can.

Hi, Chris.

Why does a blind person deserve that opportunity any more than a sighted
person?  That is, why should a blind person get any special breaks re
computer access?  There are many sighted persons who are impoverished
enough that they can't afford computers any more than can many blind
people.  If blind persons, in your eyes, should get special help re
computers and access devices, shouldn't the impoverished sighted
computer hackers get a similar breaks?

Remember, in this vale of tears, one never gets something for nothing!

Cordially,

Mike Freeman
___ CRR QWK 1.40

--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!105!126!Mike.Freeman
Internet: Mike.Freeman@f126.n105.z1.fidonet.org




------






                                ******

                  End of Issue # 2913 of the Handicap Digest

                                ******
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU