Well I am a member of ARRL.  For eight dollars and free QST from the 
national library, why not.  Many books from the ARRL include a CD that is 
accessible on the computer.  The first time I joined I paid the full rate to 
get the books and the magazine just for the ads etc, but then changed after 
that to the blind rate.  Notice they don't ask for proof of blindness as 
many organizations do.  And as many have said the way to change an 
organization is from within as a member.
73,
Ron
KD0HOY
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "brian" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 5:03 PM
Subject: Why I am not a member of Arrl


> Hi this Brian n8mnx and this does not surprise me at all that Arrl is not
> interested in excessability.  Several years ago I RECEIVED ONE OF THOSE
> LETTERS ASKING ME TO JOIN AND THEY OFFERED A FREE BOOK OR IT MIGHT HAVE 
> BEEN
> 2 AND THERE WERE 6 BOOKS TO CHOOSE FROM BUT THE LETTER STATED THAT THE
> OFFEREXCLUDED THE BLIND NOW HOW'S THAT FOR DISCRIMINATION DON'T THEY KNOW
> THAT BLIND HAVE WAYS TO READ PRINT? wE HAVE OCR SOFTWHEAR AND READING
> MACHINES AND THERE ARE SERVICES THAT WILL TAPE OR BRAILLE FOR A NOMINAL 
> FEE.
> tHE POINT IT IS THAT THEY DID NOT THINK THAT WE BLIND COULD READ ONE OF
> THERE BOOKS WE ALWAYS FIND WAYS TO GAIN ACCESS TO PRINT ARRL CHOULD KNOW
> BETTER OH THEY MAY NOTKNOW THE SPICIFICS OF OUR TECHNOLOGY BUT  THEY 
> CHOULD
> KNOW THAT WE ARE VERY RESOURCFUL ENOUGH TO FIND A WAY TO READ THE BOOKS 
> THAT
> WE WANT TO READ. I WILL NEVER BE AMEMBER OF AN ORGANIZATION THAT CHOOSES 
> TO
> ENGAGE IN VERY DISCRIMINATIVE PRACTICES AND WHEN THEY SAY THATTHEY FIGHT 
> FOR
> THE RIGHTS OF ALL HAM OPPERATORS THAT IS NOT QUITE TRUE WHAT THEY REALLY
> MEAN IS THAT IF YOUR SIGHTED THEN THEY WILL FIGHT FOR YOU BUT IF YOUR 
> BLIND
> THAN THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU.  I USE TO GET QST FROM NLS BUT I DID NOT
> LIKE THE FACTTHAT I DID NOT GET THE ENTIRE TEXT OF THE PRINT ADDITION I 
> MAY
> BE WILL TO PAY FOR AN ACCESSABLE VERSION BUT NOT FULL PRICE BECAUSE I WILL
> NOT BE ABLE TO SEE THE PHOTOS AND DIAGRAMS SO THE BLIND CHOULD BE GIVEN A
> DISCOUNT ON THE PRICE OF QST I WOULD RATHER PAY FOR QST IF I COULD GET THE
> ENTIRE TEXT OF THE PRINT ADDITION INSTEAD OF THE FREE VERSION FROM NLS 
> THAT
> QUITE LIMITED.  I AM NOT A BIG FAND OF THE ARRL IF THEY EVER GET THEIR ACT
> TOGETHER THEN AND ONLY THEN WILL I THINK ABOUT JOINING THEM BUT FOR NOW NO
> TNX.  JUST SOME THOUGHTS FROM N8MNX 73
>
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Howard, W A 9 Y B W
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 2:31 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Digital QST And Accessibility
>
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone have any idea how many blind or visually impaired hams there 
> are
> and how many are ARRL members?
>
> While this sounds drastic, should we consider a class action law suit if 
> we
> could find an attorney who would pursue this.
>
> It seems it would be easier to fix this up-front rather than fix it later.
>
> Just my thoughts.
>
> 73's
>
> Howard #3
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Buddy Brannan" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 12:33 PM
> Subject: Digital QST And Accessibility
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> A fellow blind ham apparently spoke to someone at HQ recently to ask =
>> about the upcoming digital edition of QST. The person he spoke to seemed 
>> =
>> to indicate, according to Scott, that not only was the digital edition =
>> of QST not going to be accessible, but there were no plans to make it =
>> accessible.=20
>>
>> Needless to say, this is disappointing, if true.=20
>>
>> However, it's possible that there is a misunderstanding of the issues =
>> involved here. We of course don't want a special edition, or something =
>> like that. However, it seems to me that an online edition of QST could =
>> be inherently usable by blind members. There are, of course, formats =
>> that just don't work well (or at all) with screen access technology. The 
>> =
>> system that CQ Communications has chosen to implement, for instance, =
>> can't be used by screen readers. Your standard garden variety PDF, =
>> however, will read with most screen readers, assuming that the PDF isn't 
>> =
>> solely an image scan of a paper document.=20
>>
>> I would be interested to know what digital format the ARRL will be using 
>> =
>> for its electronic distribution. Knowing this will help determine =
>> whether or not I will be able to read it when it becomes available.=20
>>
>> While I wasn't on the call that I mentioned, I can tell you that my =
>> friend felt as though he was not valued as a member in good standing, =
>> that his membership was somehow less important because of his =
>> disability, perhaps that he was asking for something unreasonable. Bear =
>> in mind that, while we do get QST on tape from the Library of Congress, =
>> the issue comes about two months after the general public gets it. I, =
>> for one, would be willing to pay full freight for a membership that =
>> included a timely and accessible version of QST. However, if my =
>> membership as a blind ham is of no value to the League, perhaps i should 
>> =
>> rethink that. Note that I have no reason yet to believe that this is the 
>> =
>> case, but one of the staff's members has certainly left at least one =
>> member with this impression, not by the possible inaccessibility of the =
>> digital edition, but rather by the way the issue was handled. Or, =
>> rather, blown off.=20
>>
>> I would love to discuss this further. We can start with what format the =
>> digital edition will take and go from there.=20
>>
>> While I must admit to some disappointment that accessibility wasn't even 
>> =
>> considered when the decision was made to go digital, and, to my =
>> knowledge, no blind members were contacted to get any input on the =
>> issue, I would like to believe that this is something that can be =
>> considered now. Better late than never.
>>
>> Vy 73,
>> --
>> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
>> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY