WW>On 12 Feb 98 02:35pm, Diane Levesque wrote to Mike Sprague:
WW> DL> to be "downward compatable" such that even people who still use
WW> DL> lCommie64's wouldn't feel isolated.  When it comes to SW and radio
WW> DL> amateur affairs, this is particularly important with blind hams and 
SWL
WW> DL> who by an large rely entirely on Commie 64s for communications (voice
WW> DL> and braille interface) online and on the air (packet).
WW>Diane,
WW>Not to nit-pick, but I do feel it important to not spread
WW>misinformation about the group my BBS has specialized in for the
WW>past 10 years!  That is, any use of the Commodore 64 with speech
But I'm not spreading misinformation, as this information has been the
result of being around a rather good blind friend of mine who, much to
my loss, moved to Kansas from here just last year.  I think the biggest
clue to your jumping off without looking first (so to speak) is your
last paragraph where you declare that you just plain ole disagree with
me period...which explains your jumping to an unfair conclusion here.
WW>was enjoyed by but a handfull of blind individuals, primarily
WW>prior to the entrance of DOS speech in the mid 80's and even then
WW>only as an alternative to the more common Apple speech systems!
Lucky for those who can afford it, you mean.  The Commie 64 network, at
least as it exists around the Metro Phoenix area, is primarily for the
benefit of those who can't.  While Apple speech systems might be "more
common" as you say, they've also been, traditionally, overpriced by MS
DOS system standards.
WW>To the best of my knowledge, refreshable braille displays never
WW>existed for anything but Dos and/or Windows machines, although
WW>there are proprietary braille devices that can be used as a dumb
WW>or VT100 compatible terminal.
Bingo at last.  Re: VT100 type use, that is....
My own eyes work, and I've seen my blind friend's system firsthand; so
you're not exactly in the best position to tell me that my eyes were
lying to me when I saw what I saw.
WW>The overwhelming number of blind people still participating in
WW>Fidonet do so via off-line reading systems such as Xpress and
WW>Blue Wave, both of which contain a "speech friendly interface"
------snip---------------
WW>echos!  Frankly, I haven't been bothered one bit by the posting
WW>of the Sweden Calling DXers in this echo, as even though I
WW>haven't read one of them, skipping them has been as easy as
WW>falling off a log, and if there is another blind person out there
WW>who can't say the same thing, I'd like to hear from them!  Sorry,
WW>but I simply don't agree with you or my old friend Mike on this
WW>one, as it simply isn't any big deal, even to those of us who are
WW>blind!
WW>                                        Willie
And now we have arrived at the real crux of the disagreement here.
It would seem to me that one who is so fond of SCDX as you are would
seek to find it in a more likely forum than this one because just about
everybody ELSE normally looks for satellite info in a satellite forum.
 * SLMR 2.1a *               Stamp Out Metered Mail!!!!!
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------