Hi Guys, again this is a really interesting debate and I am pleased
that it hasn't broken down into a flame war. It shows that GNU/FSF
have slightly different priorities and interests to the disabled,
although there is a lot of overlap in these interests everyone would
like free accessibility software, the difference is how we achieve
this - by focussing all our efforts on free software which might take
a long time and leave disabled people alienated in the short-term (or
longer) but sticking with non-free software can slow down or even
undermine free software development. I think it is the realisation and
acceptance of this conflict of principles and needs etc that has to be
the starting point for understanding and progress. Sticking to a pure
free software route is unacceptable to disabled users who want to work
and get on with their lives. Using non-free software perpetuates it
and undermines the need to develop free software. I don't know what
the solution to this dilemma is, but I am certain this is the problem
we need to wrestle with i.e. what is the best way to meet the needs of
the disabled in the short-term, but the goals of the GNU/FSF in the
mid to longer term???