[Liverpool] discrimination?

[Garry]

hi all!
as I am blind (technically) educators are expected to produce documents
for me in extra large print on A3 paper :)
this costs them money and time.. but they are (usually) happy to do it, as
I get my work done, pass my exams and become a feather in their cap :)
now.. writing files in a proprietory format surely is discrimination
against people who have less money?
there are companies producing low cost computing systems for people less
able to pay.. and one thing these low cost solutions have in common is
open source software!
having said that I doubt it is blatent disregard on the part of the
collage staff!
more likely a lack of education and lazyness!
it is though sad that these people do not keep their skillsets up to date!
"don't worry about IPv6 you wont need it for your (Cisco) exam so don't
ask ME about it!"
a quote from my recent CCNA course!
it is probably better to bring these things up with the college themselves
rather than the educators individually!
certainly accross the water (the Wirral) the collages take discrimination
very seriously and have been helpful and accomodating!
so I suggest a simple word higher up the "food chain" may sort your
problem :)
good luck!
Garry
liverpool-request at mailman.lug.org.uk wrote:
> Send Liverpool mailing list submissions to
> 	liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	liverpool-request at mailman.lug.org.uk
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	liverpool-owner at mailman.lug.org.uk
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Liverpool digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. RE: Liverpool Digest, Vol 122,	Issue 6 - where are your
>       standards ? (John Smith)
>    2. proprietary formats 2 (Vladimir)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 11:40:39 +0000
> From: John Smith <john_5029 at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [Liverpool] RE: Liverpool Digest, Vol 122,	Issue 6 - where
> 	are your standards ?
> To: <liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk>
> Message-ID: <BAY105-W30FBFE0A42BB618E685A809D130 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------
>> From: liverpool-request at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> Subject: Liverpool Digest, Vol 122, Issue 6
>> To: liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 10:39:04 +0000
>>
>> Send Liverpool mailing list submissions to
>> 	liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> 	https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> 	liverpool-request at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> 	liverpool-owner at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Liverpool digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: proprietary formats @ liverpool uni (Alan Pope)
>>    2. Re: proprietary formats @ liverpool uni (Vladimir)
>>    3. Re: proprietary formats @ liverpool uni (Giacomo Lacava)
>>    4. Re: proprietary formats @ liverpool uni (Sujita Purushothaman)
>>    5. Re: proprietary formats @ liverpool uni (Vladimir)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 19:53:12 +0000
>> From: Alan Pope
>> Subject: Re: [Liverpool] proprietary formats @ liverpool uni
>> To: liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> Message-ID:
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:47:15PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>> On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 15:26:32 +0000, Alan Pope wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alternatively you could have just looked at the name of the file and
>>>> figured out that it's an article saved from The Guardian website:-
>>>>
>>>> http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22Copying+music+legally+in+the+digital+age%22
>>>>
>>>> The first hit:-
>>>>
>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/09/copyrightlaws
>>>>
>>>> Whilst I agree that using non-free formats is bad, I think you could
>>>> possibly have approached this in a somewhat less confrontational
>>>> manner.
>>>
>>> I disagree. Firstly, you have no way of knowing whether the file is
>>> that
>>> article, just because the title is the same.
>>
>> Whilst this is indeed true, the reason I mentioned it was because there
>> was
>> a lot of rant and rhetoric in the mail sent to the originator of the mht
>> file. The "you're singling me out" "discriminating against me" type of
>> response in my experience is less effective than a _polite_ request to
>> make
>> the file available in an open format. I was in no way advocating using
>> non-free formats, merely pointing out that it's self destructive to the
>> cause to rant at people who in all likelyhood are just doing their job
>> with
>> the tools they're given.
>>
>> Fact is that in all likelyhood the file _is_ a copy of the Guardian
>> article
>> which may well have been originally been supplied with text such as
>> "Take a
>> look at this Guardian article". To suggest that you should bother
>> googling
>> _because_ the file is supplied in a non-free format is being bloody
>> minded
>> IMO.
>>
>>> Secondly, what happens next
>>> time an article is made available in this format? If you're going to
>>> try
>>> to change things, sooner is better than later.
>>>
>>
>> Which could be effected much quicker if you were to show the originator
>> the
>> error of their ways in a polite manner. Barking at them about WINE this
>> and
>> compiling that isn't the right way to go about it. Getting hold of the
>> document in html format with the attached web collatoral, and feeding
>> back
>> to the originator in an open format such as a zip file might yield
>> better
>> results. Perhaps with a note saying "In the future I and other people
>> would
>> appreciate it if you take this approach to the distribution of files".
>>
>>> Making any data available as an exe file is a terrible idea,
>>> particularly
>>> for Windows users. Forcing people to download and run executable files
>>> is
>>> an easy way to infect their machines.
>>>
>>
>> I never advocated otherwise. I merely attempted to assist someone in
>> unpacking what was originally suggested to be self extracting zip
>> archive.
>>
>> I have to say I find it somewhat ironic that the complainant here is
>> making
>> a big deal about file distribution in open formats then brazenly states
>> that
>> the file opened fine on an Apple Mac running Quicktime. Not exactly the
>> bastian of open source products is it? :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Al.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:37:56 +0000
>> From: Vladimir
>> Subject: Re: [Liverpool] proprietary formats @ liverpool uni
>> To: "Alan Pope" , 	"Liverpool Linux User Group"
>>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Alan, there's a confusion a bit here.
>> the thing is that the letter where i was "barking" about
>> compiling, etc was my letter after a harsh exchange of emails
>> before (about the MHT issue). i just can't post the letters of my
>> lecturer
>> without asking him, as u understand.
>>
>> about being bastian of open source. o believe me,
>> i am. sometimes even to extremes. but this case is a bit
>> different - because very large proportion of music students
>> use Macs (because of Logic Pro), and i wasn't speaking
>> only on my behalf there.
>> even worse - it is no longer all about one OS being
>> disadvantaged (say, Linux), but anything else other than Windows.
>> well, that's extremely not fair, IMHO.
>>
>>
>> On 06/03/2008, Alan Pope  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:47:15PM +0000, Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 15:26:32 +0000, Alan Pope wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Alternatively you could have just looked at the name of the file and
>>>>> figured out that it's an article saved from The Guardian website:-
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22Copying+music+legally+in+the+digital+age%22
>>>>>
>>>>> The first hit:-
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jan/09/copyrightlaws
>>>>>
>>>>> Whilst I agree that using non-free formats is bad, I think you could
>>>>> possibly have approached this in a somewhat less confrontational
>>> manner.
>>>>
>>>> I disagree. Firstly, you have no way of knowing whether the file is
>>>> that
>>>> article, just because the title is the same.
>>>
>>>
>>> Whilst this is indeed true, the reason I mentioned it was because there
>>> was
>>> a lot of rant and rhetoric in the mail sent to the originator of the
>>> mht
>>> file. The "you're singling me out" "discriminating against me" type of
>>> response in my experience is less effective than a _polite_ request to
>>> make
>>> the file available in an open format. I was in no way advocating using
>>> non-free formats, merely pointing out that it's self destructive to the
>>> cause to rant at people who in all likelyhood are just doing their job
>>> with
>>> the tools they're given.
>>>
>>> Fact is that in all likelyhood the file _is_ a copy of the Guardian
>>> article
>>> which may well have been originally been supplied with text such as
>>> "Take
>>> a
>>> look at this Guardian article". To suggest that you should bother
>>> googling
>>> _because_ the file is supplied in a non-free format is being bloody
>>> minded
>>> IMO.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Secondly, what happens next
>>>> time an article is made available in this format? If you're going to
>>>> try
>>>> to change things, sooner is better than later.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Which could be effected much quicker if you were to show the originator
>>> the
>>> error of their ways in a polite manner. Barking at them about WINE this
>>> and
>>> compiling that isn't the right way to go about it. Getting hold of the
>>> document in html format with the attached web collatoral, and feeding
>>> back
>>> to the originator in an open format such as a zip file might yield
>>> better
>>> results. Perhaps with a note saying "In the future I and other people
>>> would
>>> appreciate it if you take this approach to the distribution of files".
>>>
>>>
>>>> Making any data available as an exe file is a terrible idea,
>>> particularly
>>>> for Windows users. Forcing people to download and run executable files
>>> is
>>>> an easy way to infect their machines.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I never advocated otherwise. I merely attempted to assist someone in
>>> unpacking what was originally suggested to be self extracting zip
>>> archive.
>>>
>>> I have to say I find it somewhat ironic that the complainant here is
>>> making
>>> a big deal about file distribution in open formats then brazenly states
>>> that
>>> the file opened fine on an Apple Mac running Quicktime. Not exactly the
>>> bastian of open source products is it? :)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Al.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Liverpool mailing list
>>> Liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Support Underground!
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/liverpool/attachments/20080306/7d5b48da/attachment-0001.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 22:47:21 +0000
>> From: "Giacomo Lacava"
>> Subject: Re: [Liverpool] proprietary formats @ liverpool uni
>> To: "Alan Pope" , 	"Liverpool Linux User Group"
>>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:53 PM, Alan Pope  wrote:
>>> To suggest that you should bother googling
>>>  _because_ the file is supplied in a non-free format is being bloody
>>> minded
>>>  IMO.
>>
>> "Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people
>> attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore,
>> depends on unreasonable people."
>>
>> George Bernard Shaw
>>
>> :)
>>
>> cheers
>> Giacomo
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > Secondly, what happens next
>>> > time an article is made available in this format? If you're going to
>>> try
>>> > to change things, sooner is better than later.
>>> >
>>>
>>>  Which could be effected much quicker if you were to show the
>>> originator the
>>>  error of their ways in a polite manner. Barking at them about WINE
>>> this and
>>>  compiling that isn't the right way to go about it. Getting hold of the
>>>  document in html format with the attached web collatoral, and feeding
>>> back
>>>  to the originator in an open format such as a zip file might yield
>>> better
>>>  results. Perhaps with a note saying "In the future I and other people
>>> would
>>>  appreciate it if you take this approach to the distribution of files".
>>>
>>>
>>> > Making any data available as an exe file is a terrible idea,
>>> particularly
>>> > for Windows users. Forcing people to download and run executable
>>> files is
>>> > an easy way to infect their machines.
>>> >
>>>
>>>  I never advocated otherwise. I merely attempted to assist someone in
>>>  unpacking what was originally suggested to be self extracting zip
>>> archive.
>>>
>>>  I have to say I find it somewhat ironic that the complainant here is
>>> making
>>>  a big deal about file distribution in open formats then brazenly
>>> states that
>>>  the file opened fine on an Apple Mac running Quicktime. Not exactly
>>> the
>>>  bastian of open source products is it? :)
>>>
>>>  Cheers,
>>>  Al.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  _______________________________________________
>>>  Liverpool mailing list
>>>  Liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>>  https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Giacomo Lacava
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:25:06 +0000
>> From: Sujita Purushothaman
>> Subject: Re: [Liverpool] proprietary formats @ liverpool uni
>> To: Liverpool Linux User Group
>> Message-ID:
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Alan Pope wrote:
>>> Whilst I agree that using non-free formats is bad, I think you could
>>> possibly have approached this in a somewhat less confrontational
>>> manner.
>>>
>> I think lecturers have the obligation to be inclusive. I wouldn't blame
>> students for being confrontational when lecturers are not inclusive. If
>> someone came up to me and said, I don't have any software that can read
>> your PDF  handouts, I would immediately do 3 things:
>> 1. Point and help him/her install Adobe Reader.
>> 2. Give the same document in word and try to accommodate them as far as
>> possible next time.
>> 3. Then give a lecture about free, open and closed file formats. I do
>> this as much as possible anyway. :-)
>>
>> Outside an educational establishment, I would skip 1 and 2.
>>
>> Vladimir: You could also point them to the VirtualDub case and explain
>> how once you save your data in one format you are effectively saying I'm
>> going to pay Microsoft money for as long as I want access to this data,
>> especially considering that software is now leased instead of bought.
>>
>> Rgds,
>> Sujita
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 5
>> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 10:39:00 +0000
>> From: Vladimir
>> Subject: Re: [Liverpool] proprietary formats @ liverpool uni
>> To: "Liverpool Linux User Group"
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Sujita!
>> what's the VirtualDub case? can you remind?
>>
>> Vladimir
>>
>> On 07/03/2008, Sujita Purushothaman  wrote:
>>>
>>> Alan Pope wrote:
>>>> Whilst I agree that using non-free formats is bad, I think you could
>>>> possibly have approached this in a somewhat less confrontational
>>>> manner.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think lecturers have the obligation to be inclusive. I wouldn't blame
>>> students for being confrontational when lecturers are not inclusive. If
>>> someone came up to me and said, I don't have any software that can read
>>> your PDF  handouts, I would immediately do 3 things:
>>> 1. Point and help him/her install Adobe Reader.
>>> 2. Give the same document in word and try to accommodate them as far as
>>> possible next time.
>>> 3. Then give a lecture about free, open and closed file formats. I do
>>> this as much as possible anyway. :-)
>>>
>>> Outside an educational establishment, I would skip 1 and 2.
>>>
>>> Vladimir: You could also point them to the VirtualDub case and explain
>>> how once you save your data in one format you are effectively saying
>>> I'm
>>> going to pay Microsoft money for as long as I want access to this data,
>>> especially considering that software is now leased instead of bought.
>>>
>>> Rgds,
>>>
>>> Sujita
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Liverpool mailing list
>>> Liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Support Underground!
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/liverpool/attachments/20080307/aa18a874/attachment.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Liverpool mailing list
>> Liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
>> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
>>
>> End of Liverpool Digest, Vol 122, Issue 6
>> *****************************************
>
>
> Maybe I'm missing the point here, not having attended university, but
> surely there are standards laid down for IT in Liverpool University ?
> If not a standard desktop then certainly a tool set or at least a set of
> file formats ? Should this desktop/tool set/file format turn out to be an
> offering of Microsoft then so be it.  It seems that without such standards
> this kind of thing (incompatability) is bound to happen. Yes we all like
> freedom but look at the problem another way - the lecturers presumably
> give their presentations in English and don't cater for non English
> speakers. So English is the standard language used at the establishment.
> Imagine the havoc if a lecturer had to be multilingual !
>
> Yes I am a Linux user, (or I wouldn't be here), but having worked in large
> IT departments for both the public and private sectors I know the
> importance in having standards for CIT, like it or not.
> I would have thought an organization such as a university would also have
> such a framework in place. Obviously these standards  should apply  across
> the board to staff as well as students. Perhaps then the staff and
> students can get on with the business of education rather than worrying
> about peripheral issues.
>
> Apologies if this sounds harsh - it just seems common sense to me.
>
> Cheers
> EdH.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get Hotmail on your mobile, text MSN to 63463!
> http://mobile.uk.msn.com/pc/mail.aspx
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 12:05:32 +0000
> From: Vladimir <vladimir.jakubovskij at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Liverpool] proprietary formats 2
> To: "Liverpool Linux User Group" <liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk>
> Message-ID:
> 	<8fbe29aa0803070405n2dc9d42o11e5ced00cc834f6 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> hi everybody.
> once again, another article posted as an exec file :)
> same module
>
>
> vladimir
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://mailman.lug.org.uk/pipermail/liverpool/attachments/20080307/8b6fda46/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Liverpool mailing list
> Liverpool at mailman.lug.org.uk
> https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/liverpool
>
> End of Liverpool Digest, Vol 122, Issue 7
> *****************************************
>


-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1
GCC at GE@GIT at GO dpu S-: a+ C+++ L++ E-- W+++ N+ o+++ w-- O M+ PS+++ PE-- Y++
PGP+ t++ 5 X++ R- tv b+ DI++ D---- G e++* h*++ r+++ Y++++
-----END GEEK CODE BLOCK-----