How would they even deem to determine that one is not blind over the internet?
It seems they decided that based on the author saying that they “looked at the browser console” so either based on using the word “looked” or they deemed using the browser console to be sketchy and enough to disqualify the author, either way pretty shitty.
I’m pretty sure blind people still use the word “looked” in that context when communicating online.
I didn’t think I implied otherwise, I did say it was shitty of them because it makes no sense to assume someone isn’t blind just because of their word choice. I’m just guessing at what their reasoning is.
It feels, to me, like they thought the author was trying to get an accessibility cookie for a bot.
Could be that too, but it would have to be still based on either the author using the word “looked” or mentioning using the browser console because that’s the only information they could be going off of, which is all I was saying.
I suspect they latched onto the 401 return code and made no determination on whether the author is or isn’t blind.
“It sounds like they want to use this for a bot - they can’t be blind!”
