Mary.Otten@p0.f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.org (Mary Otten) (06/21/91)
Index Number: 16279
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
I hesitate to even mention this here, as I have no proof. So, Iwill say
that I have heard and am in no way endorsing this as true, because Ido
not personally know it to be so, that the reason the NFB is able to get
such unbelievably favorable rates is that when they sign up to go
somewhere they not only guarantee that there will be sch and such a
number of people coming to the hotel, they back that up with some sort
of cash advance payment. I say again, Ido not know this to be true from
personal knowledge. I heard it last year in the context of wondering
why, now that ACB has gone to the multi-year negotiations instead of the
zoo that we used to have, we're not getting anything even remotely close
to the rates NFB gets. The answer Igot is the cash payment story. True?
Who knows. Onething's for sre. A call to the NFB national office isn't
going to elicit an affirmative response, regardless of whether the
statement is true.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!261!1055.0!Mary.Otten
Internet: Mary.Otten@p0.f1055.n261.z1.fidonet.orgDavid.Andrews@f89.n129.z1.fidonet.org (David Andrews) (06/28/91)
Index Number: 16550
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
WW> I've been sitting back watching this thread, waiting for
WW> some definitive statements, but so far, nobody has come up
WW> with any! That is, nobody said that convention groups don't
WW> get special rates, and I assume that is because everybody
WW> knows that, but Walter asserted that the NFB got better rates
WW> than the others due to the fact they represent a group of
WW> blind conventioneers! I don't know what he is basing this
WW> upon, but for sure, if we are talking better rates than
WW> similarly sized groups, and I am sure similarly qualified rate
WW> negotiators, I can understand his conclusion.
WW> WALTER, you got any numbers to go with your claim or any
WW> other supportive evidence? Frankly, I am amazed if a hotel
WW> will give special rates to blind people, and if anything,
WW> would expect the opposite due to what I would guess them to
WW> assume to be higher costs on their end, but yes, if what you
WW> say is true, we can add it to the growing list of
WW> incongruities many of us see in the NFB!
Willie, It strikes me that this is just another example of Walter, and others,
looking for things to give the NFB grief over. I have sat in Dr. Jernigan's
office over the past few months, while he has talked to Hotels. He has, in to
way used blindness as a way of extracting special hotel rates. It is
conceivable, but not likely, that a Hotel might give us a special rate. It is
much less likely that they would do it a second time. So, why do we keep get
invited back to places where we have been, at still low rates?
I consider this topic just another example of gratuitouss hassling of the NFB.
Why is it that ACB members and sympathesizers here seem to spend a good deal of
time attacking us. If they are right, and we are wrong, then they should
triumph in the end and shouldn't have to spend so much time putting us down.
You don't see us doing that. I think that a major element of the ACB is its
oposition to the NFB. You take that away and there isn't much.
If you read the Braille Monitor and the Braille Forum ten years ago, the attacks
on the other side, by both were numerous and uuncalled for in my opinion. I see
much less of this today, although more so in the Forum. The January-February
issue for example, had two articles that were veehemently anti-NFB.
We do invite criticism at times, because we take strong positions. However,
some people might want to examine their motivations in what they say and how
they say it. Some people are living in the past. Things are changing.
... David Andrews
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!89!David.Andrews
Internet: David.Andrews@f89.n129.z1.fidonet.orgGary.Petraccaro@f90.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Gary Petraccaro) (06/28/91)
Index Number: 16553
[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]
-> In a message to David Andrews <06-10-91 14:21> William Wilson wrote:
->
-> WW> should be mugged
-> WW> rather than accept the sighted perpetrater's misguided
-> WW> sympathy because
I'm going to pick a nitt, or is it a Knitt. No, this isn't a put up
job for those of you who always believe that Willie and I act in concert.
Anyhow... What's with this Misguided? What in hell is misguided about
someone who shows what might be the last vestige of human feeling by not
mugging a handicapped individual? It used to be we treated women with
deference, old people with forebearance and provided aid when needed--these
were the ideals anyway--how we were supposed to act. Now, we're supposed
to substitute a "screw-'em-all" attitude? For what? So we can all pretend
that we're equal because we're all at the mercy of conditions which Hobbes
described as "nasty, brutish, and short"? Btw, for those who avoided Tom's
point about rape, it was right on target. His question has it right, are
we so bound up with this issue that we have come to ask about mugging,
rape, or theft, or even murder in terms of civil rights? Damn, I can hear
it now. "Kill me, oh, please kill me! I'm blind and just as good as
anyone else. You can do your bit to help promote the handicapped by just
killing me." <evil grin> Of course, the next step is to murder, rob, or
rape, to prove equality. Of course, in doing so, we couldn't just prey on
the non-handicapped world, now, could we?
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!90!Gary.Petraccaro
Internet: Gary.Petraccaro@f90.n129.z1.fidonet.org