Introduction§

What do virtue-signalers and privileged people without disabilities sharing content about accessibility on Linux being trash have in common? They don’t actually really care about the group they’re defending; they just exploit these victims’ unfortunate situation to either fuel hate against groups and projects actually trying to make the world a better place.

I never thought I’d be this upset to a point I’d be writing an article about something this sensitive with a clickbait-y title. It’s simultaneously demotivating, unproductive, and infuriating. I’m here writing this post fully knowing that I could have been working on accessibility in GNOME, but really, I’m so tired of having my mood ruined because of privileged people spending at most 5 minutes to write erroneous posts and then pretending to be oblivious when confronted while it takes us 5 months of unpaid work to get a quarter of recognition, let alone acknowledgment, without accounting for the time “wasted” addressing these accusations.

I’m Not Angry§

I’m not mad. I’m absolutely furious and disappointed in the Linux Desktop community for being quiet in regards to any kind of celebration to advancing accessibility, while proceeding to share content and cheer for random privileged people from big-name websites or social media who have literally put a negative amount of effort into advancing accessibility on Linux. I’m explicitly stating a negative amount because they actually make it significantly more stressful for us.

None of this is fair. If you’re the kind of person who stays quiet when we celebrate huge accessibility milestones, yet shares (or even writes) content that trash talk the people directly or indirectly writing the fucking software you use for free, you are the reason why accessibility on Linux is shit.

No one in their right mind wants to volunteer in a toxic environment where their efforts are hardly recognized by the public and they are blamed for “not doing enough”, especially when they are expected to take in all kinds of harassment, nonconstructive criticism, and slander for a salary of 0$.

There’s only one thing I am shamefully confident about: I am not okay in the head. I shouldn’t be working on accessibility anymore. The recognition-to-smearing ratio is unbearably low and arguably unhealthy, but leaving people in unfortunate situations behind is also not in accordance with my values.

I’ve been putting so much effort, quite literally hundreds of hours, into:

1. thinking of ways to come up with inclusive designs and experiences;
2. imagining how I’d use something if I had a certain disability or condition;
3. asking for advice and feedback from people with disabilities;
4. not getting paid from any company or organization; and
5. making sure that all the accessibility-related work is in the public, and stays in the public.

Number 5 is especially important to me. I personally go as far as to refuse to contribute to projects under a permissive license, and/or that utilize a contributor license agreement, and/or that utilize anything riskily similar to these two, because I am of the opinion that no amount of code for accessibility should either be put under a paywall or be obscured and proprietary.

Permissive licenses make it painlessly easy for abusers to fork, build an ecosystem on top of it which may include accessibility-related improvements, slap a price tag alongside it, all without publishing any of these additions/changes. Corporations have been doing that for decades, and they’ll keep doing it until there’s heavy push back. The only time I would contribute to a project under a permissive license is when the tool is the accessibility infrastructure itself. Contributor license agreements are significantly worse in that regard, so I prefer to avoid them completely.

The Truth Nobody Is Telling You§

KDE hired a contractor to work on accessibility throughout the KDE ecosystem, including complying with the EU Directive to allow selling hardware with Plasma.

GNOME’s new executive director, Steven Deobald, is partially blind.

The GNOME Foundation has been investing a lot of money to improve accessibility on Linux, for example funding Newton, a Wayland accessibility project and AccessKit integration into GNOME technologies. Around 250,000€ (1/4) of the STF budget was spent solely on accessibility. And get this: literally everybody managing these contracts and communication with funders are volunteers; they’re ensuring people with disabilities earn a living, but aren’t receiving anything in return. These are the real heroes who deserve endless praise.

The Culprits§

Do you want to know who we should be blaming? Those who are benefiting from the community’s effort while investing very little to nothing into accessibility.

This includes a significant portion of the companies sponsoring GNOME and even companies that employ developers to work on GNOME. These companies are the ones making hundreds of millions, if not billions, in net profit indirectly from GNOME, and investing little to nothing into accessibility. However, the worst offenders are the companies actively using GNOME without ever donating anything to fund the project.

Some companies actually do put an effort, like Red Hat and Igalia. Red Hat employs people with disabilities to work on accessibility in GNOME, one of which I actually rely on when making accessibility-related contributions in GNOME. Igalia funds Orca, the screen reader as part of GNOME, which is something the Linux community should be thankful of.

The privileged people who keep sharing and making content around accessibility on Linux being bad are, in my opinion, significantly worse than the companies profiting off of GNOME. Companies are and stay quiet, but the privileged people add an additional burden to contributors by either trash talking from their content or sharing trash talkers. Once again, no volunteer deserves to be in the position of being shamed and ridiculed for “not doing enough”, since no one is entitled to their free time, but themselves.

My Work Is Free but the Worth Is Not§

Earlier in this article, I mentioned, and I quote: “I’ve been putting so much effort, quite literally hundreds of hours […]”. Let’s put an emphasis on “hundreds”. Here’s a list of most accessibility-related merge requests that have been incorporated into GNOME:

• GNOME Calculator: !180 and !186
• GNOME Calendar: !331, !332, !333, !335, !336, !337, !344, !348, !358, !360, !362, !387, !388, !390, !421, !435, !489, !559, !563, !564, !569, !576, !587, and !588
• GNOME Contacts: !230
• GNOME Settings: !3017, !3018, and !3027
• GNOME Software: !1519 and !1570
• Papers: !119, !122, and !527
• libadwaita: !1243 (superseded by !1327) and !1245

GNOME Calendar’s !559 addresses an issue where event widgets were unable to be focused and activated by the keyboard. That was present since the very beginning of GNOME Calendar’s existence, to be specific: for more than a decade. This alone was was a two-week effort. Despite it being less than 100 lines of code, nobody truly knew what to do to have them working properly before. This was followed up by !576, which made the event buttons usable in the month view with a keyboard, and then !587, which properly conveys the states of the widgets. Both combined are another two-week effort.

Then, at the time of writing this article, !564 adds 640 lines of code, which is something I’ve been volunteering on for more than a month, excluding the time before I opened the merge request.

Let’s do a little bit of math together with ‘only’ !559, !576, and !587. Just as a reminder: these three merge requests are a four-week effort in total, which I volunteered full-time—8 hours a day, or 160 hours a month. I compiled a small table that illustrates its worth:

To summarize the table: those three merge requests that I worked on for free were worth 9,393.60$ CAD (6,921.36$ USD) in total at a minimum.

Just a reminder:

• these merge requests exclude the time spent to review the submitted code;
• these merge requests exclude the time I spent testing the code;
• these merge requests exclude the time we spent coordinating these milestones;
• these calculations exclude the 30+ merge requests submitted to GNOME; and
• these calculations exclude the merge requests I submitted to third-party GNOME-adjacent apps.

Now just imagine how I feel when I’m told I’m “not doing enough”, either directly or indirectly. Whenever anybody says we’re “not doing enough”, I feel very much included, and I will absolutely take it personally.

It All Trickles Down to “GNOME Bad”§

I fully expect everything I say in this article to be dismissed or be taken out of context on the basis of ad hominem, simply by the mere fact I’m a GNOME Foundation member / regular GNOME contributor. Either that, or be subject to whataboutism because another GNOME contributor made a comment that had nothing to do with mine but ‘is somewhat related to this topic and therefore should be pointed out just because it was maybe-probably-possibly-perhaps ableist’. I can’t speak for other regular contributors, but I presume that they don’t feel comfortable talking about this because they dared be a GNOME contributor. At least, that’s how I felt for the longest time.

Any content related to accessibility that doesn’t dunk on GNOME doesn’t foresee as many engagement, activity, and reaction as content that actively attacks GNOME, regardless of whether the criticism is fair. Regular GNOME contributors like myself don’t always feel comfortable defending ourselves because dismissing GNOME developers just for being GNOME developers is apparently a trend…

Final Word§

Dear people with disabilities,

I won’t insist that we’re either your allies or your enemies—I have no right to claim that whatsoever.

I wasn’t looking for recognition. I wasn’t looking for acknowledgment since the very beginning either. I thought I would be perfectly capable of quietly improving accessibility in GNOME, but because of the overall community’s persistence to smear developers’ efforts without actually tackling the underlying issues within the stack, I think I’ve justified myself to at least demand for acknowledgment from the wider community.

I highly doubt it will happen anyway, because the Linux community feeds off of drama and trash talking instead of being productive, without realizing that it negatively demotivates active contributors while pushing away potential contributors. And worst of all: people with disabilities are the ones affected the most because they are misled into thinking that we don’t care.

It’s so unfair and infuriating that all the work I do and share online gain very little activity compared to random posts and articles from privileged people without disabilities that rant about the Linux desktop’s accessibility being trash. It doesn’t help that I become severely anxious sharing accessibility-related work to avoid signs of virtue-signaling. The last thing I want is to (unintentionally) give any sign and impression of pretending to care about accessibility.

I beg you, please keep writing banger posts like fireborn’s I Want to Love Linux. It Doesn’t Love Me Back series and their interluding post. We need more people with disabilities to keep reminding developers that you exist and your conditions and disabilities are a spectrum and not absolute.

We simultaneously need more interest from people with disabilities to contribute to FOSS, and the wider community to be significantly more intolerant of bullies who profit from smearing and demotivating people who are actively trying. We could also take inspiration from “Accessibility on Linux sucks, but GNOME and KDE are making progress” by OSNews, as they acknowledge that accessibility on Linux is suboptimal while recognizing the efforts of GNOME and KDE.