Kind: Replies

In reply to @BorrisInABox.

@BorrisInABox Yeah same.

In reply to @BorrisInABox.

@BorrisInABox I just … That's actively fucking hostile on their part. And the thing is, this used to not be a thing, because I have an archive from the middle of last year that contains this data.

In reply to @BorrisInABox.

@BorrisInABox Yes very boo and very hiss.

In reply to @BorrisInABox.

@BorrisInABox @ppatel @talon I'm not going to host my own because I'd rather chew on broken glass than host mail again.

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @talon I have domain-based. I don't mind changing txt records or anything like that, mostly concerned about migration. Don't use docs so that part at least shouldn't be an issue.

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @talon Yeah I need to figure out how much of a hassle this is going to be.

In reply to @ppatel.

@ppatel @talon Making me seriously consider moving off of GApps. Again.

In reply to @summersun704.

@summersun704 @cadence022 Yes, that is absolutely beyond shitty.

In reply to @aardrian.

@aardrian And if you're gonna tell me it still works in Chrome, I'm gonna rant again about how I'm being compelled to trade privacy for accessibility again.

In reply to @aardrian.

@aardrian So who broke display: contents this time? Is it everybody or is there a browser I can use where it still works as fixed?

In reply to @nathan.

@nathan This should stay in plugin territory for now, until we get past all the hype and we find that some sort of machine learning is actually useful for WordPress in ways that fit with what WordPress is tring to achieve.

In reply to @aardrian.

@aardrian Oh no Adrian you're being such a meany automated accessibility remediation by proprietary software working proprietarily is teh future and don't you dare question that or we'll publicly accuse you of murdering truckloads of puppies!

In reply to @matt.

@matt @objectinspace @SingingNala @miki I believe so yes. But I don't have an older copy around to double check that.

In reply to @SingingNala.

@SingingNala @objectinspace @miki Yeah and apparently they penalize you for not contributing. That's why I got involved. Because my friend was being penalized by her congregation's elders along with family members. I did it for her but I swear that was the crepiest bit of accessibility related tech support I've done.

In reply to @SingingNala.

@SingingNala @objectinspace @miki For them, "fair use" as a legal concept just never happened.

In reply to @SingingNala.

@SingingNala @objectinspace @miki I know about their accessibility hacks because I had a blind friend who was a JW who needed help getting it all up and running. That library was the only way she could get access to stuff. Also, did I mention they're letigious and copyright trolls?

In reply to @objectinspace.

@objectinspace @SingingNala @miki Sorry correction: the toggle added their mirror driver. It showed up in the Windows7 erra.

In reply to @objectinspace.

@objectinspace @SingingNala @miki Yeah there used to be a key you'd have to add under local machine I think and then their application would be reasonably accessible. If you didn't do that, the text displayed pretty weirdly at least for screen readers. Then they added a toggle, but all it did was do the work to add that key for you.

In reply to @SingingNala.

@SingingNala @objectinspace @miki Also, unless they put it back on the website, they strategically edited Watchtower and Awake! issues to remove all the condemnation of oral sex at some point. From what I understand there was a grassroots rebellion over it in the late 70's.

In reply to @SingingNala.

@SingingNala @objectinspace @miki I always thought it was interesting and/or suspicious that they only included publications from 1950 or so onwards. Then again, everything before that is *wildly* out of sync with the stuff from 1950 onwards. Especially the 1879 to 1920 period.