On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 08:27:15AM -0800, Curtis Shimamoto wrote: > On 02/11/14 at 10:11am, Bigby James wrote: > > On Mon Feb 10 12:20:45 EST 2014 Kyle wrote: > > > I'll take a little frustration of non-linux using normal > > > human beings over a captcha that completely excludes visually impaired > > > normal human beings any day. > > > > I can understand your concern and applaud your consideration, but which of those > > two groups do you suppose would flood the forums if the barrier to entry were > > lowered? Let's be frank: The number of visually impaired users is, always has > > been and always will be outstripped by the number of help vampires. If a > > visually impaired Arch user needs help with a complex setup, that user can still > > consult the wiki and mailing list without the same barrier present on the > > forums, as anyone who's used all three can attest. I don't know what solutions > > (if any) exist for IRC users who are visually impaired, but that's a third > > option. > > > > Really, what you're talking about here is letting in an unwanted majority to > > avoid upsetting an otherwise acceptable, but extremely miniscule minority. > > There's no simple solution to such a conundrum, but there are multiple avenues > > of communication in the Arch community. There just seems to be something about > > online BBS that attracts the intellectually lazy in a manner that other online > > communication media do not. > > I think you've missed what Kyle is saying here. From what I understand > (as a non-blind user), traditional captchas that are super hard to read > and easily deciphered by computers are what tend to not be usable by the > visually impaired. > > The captcha that we currently have should be great for the visually > impaired using some of the available linux tools such as espeakup. > > -- > Curtis Shimamoto You're right--after reading his post again, it looks like I misread it the first time. Most captchas I see nowadays have a button for vocalization, which is what I thought he was suggesting. Thanks for clearing that up.
