[sudo-discuss] [omni-building] [omni-discuss] Accessibility Liaison?

[Ryan]

It's not just one person or one situation. And it's not always in an
aggressive way. And it's not just an issue of not caring (although I have
experienced that). It's an issue of feasibility.

I've heard snowball arguments. I know that Material Print Machine tries
their hardest to be chemically sensitive but cannot function without some
volatile chemicals that can cause problems.

If we got some serious ventilation going on, maybe we'd be able to deal
with CCL and sudo. But the 3D printers could be an issue.

And the few times I've tried to broach this subject, I have hit hard walls.
I've also had a lot of support. But I've also heard a lot of people
basically say "it'd be too hard to care about such a small minority."

I just think that anyone who is going to be dealing with this at the Omni
needs to know that not everyone is on board and that they're going to hear
some really insensitive stuff. From people you might not expect. My request
to have the Omni ban simply *spraying of perfume in the space* left me in
tears about ready to leave the space because of reactions like this from
many members.

I did have a specific issue with one member who I try not to interact with
now, who followed me out and proceeded to become aggressive and tell me I
can't survive in the real world, but that was handled for the most part.
That's not the issue, though.

I don't know. My brain isn't really functioning well (brain fog yay) but I
think anyone dealing with accessibility at the Omni, especially things
people are less versed in than physical (which is bad enough to deal with)
should be well aware that while some people may be totally on board, there
are some people who are solidly against.

On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Laura Turiano <scylla at riseup.net> wrote:

>  I would like to know who said that, Ryan, so that we can have a
> conversation with them about their attitude.
>
> Laura
>
>
> On 4/19/15 8:09 PM, Ryan wrote:
>
> The consistent reaction I've gotten from the community at large is "We
> don't actually care about people with chemical sensitivities and would
> actively block any attempts to make the space more accessible to those with
> respiratory problems who are 'asking too much.'"
>
>  So, it might be best to be honest with her, rather than pretend like the
> Omni is actually going to actively work to be accessible.
>
>  Sorry if this sounds pessimistic, but eh.
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 8:06 PM, niki <niki.shelley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello friends,
>>
>>  Someone came in today who was very concerned with our efforts to make
>> our space truly accessible - she was particularly concerned with building
>> improvements and the impact on those with chemical sensitivities. She was
>> also concerned with the sound system at today's event as there were some
>> issues w/it that made it difficult for people to hear.
>>
>>  She asked us to not use any materials that will inhibit those with
>> chemical sensitivities from accessing the space and to create communication
>> around our accessibility and needs.
>>
>>  She asked to see our plan for how we will do this. We don't have this
>> scoped out currently and I'm wondering if someone would be willing to take
>> on the task of researching this issue and making recommendations to the
>> building Working Group as well as drawing up a basic outline for providing
>> greater accessibility.
>>
>>  Can someone volunteer for this?
>>
>>  xo
>>
>>  N
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.omnicommons.org
>> https://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> building mailing listbuilding at lists.omnicommons.orghttps://omnicommons.org/lists/listinfo/building
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20150419/2d3ce726/attachment.html>