No, not really. I don't really care what someone's family background is, and it's a rare person who goes around calling herself Alison yet prefers to be referred to as a guy (if that's you, fair enough, but jeez, how often does that happen). If I were there in person I'd feel a bit singled out and be mildly irritated at the waste of time.

Overall this feels like movement designed to help the visually impaired developed with no involvement by the visually impaired.

Microsoft is one of the strongest company implementing accessibility in their products. They value diversity and inclusion, not only focussed on their customers, but also in their employees.
That said, as a blind person I find it helpful when important information is described.
It's cool to note that there is diversity among the presenters.
The first person is from India , she's a female, and she is dering to wear sexy shoes.
,
As a shallow person, I'm interested to know the women's breast size. OP can you describe them more in detail ?

This is stupid! AS a blind person, I don't need to know what kind of shoes the woman is wearing. Also, I don't care what race someone is or what pronoun someone is. I kind of feel like this is demeaning to both sighted and blind people.

I don’t find it that useful, but I can see why people might want to know. Also, I would think that some of this is duplicating information that's available to sighted people. For instance, if someone put their pronouns on a nametag or the intro slide of their presentation, it makes sense to give that same information aloud for those who can't see it. As to physical descriptions, it doesn’t do much for me, but I’ve never been able to see much. I can see it being useful to someone who used to have sight and still thinks of people in a more visual way. In short, I don’t find it helpful, but I can understand the intent and I don’t mind it in case it helps someone else.

What would be the difference?
Conservative assholes don't care about accessibility. They also don't care for diversity in their custumers and in their employees. They will most likely not hire people of color, women in leadership roles, and people with disabilities.

No. It contributes nothing of value to the conversation, and I really wish well-to-do sighted people would stop.

Seems potentially useful to me. I don't think it's particularly central information, but it can give more of a sense of the people involved. It's not too different from how one might do an audio-described layer of the presentation, so I don't understand why people object so much to it.

No it's just unnecessary info

I'd find it annoying. Seems like virtue signaling.

I like it. If I wanted a flavorless presentation of dry facts with zero personality from the presenter, I'd watch half of the people on the Food Network.

I find it an interesting glimpse into the presenters to see what they think of to describe themselves. It also helps to show that this isn't a company staffed exclusively by stuffy white dudes, which is always a plus to me.

I am a person who has gone blind later in life. At age 39. I have found that asking people to describe themselves to me very useful, and anxiety reducing step. It also helps me break the ice with somebody that I might not be comfortable around.

Ehh... Idk how to feel on this. As someone said tho if I was there in person I'd feel a bit uncomfortable and singled out as I kinda like to be that person that's out of the way, so to speak, and I would prefer if they stuck with the presentation as normal.

Annoying lol. Blindness is the great equalizer. Everyone’s opinions should be valued the same, regardless of gender or skin color. Also, describing to a blind person your skin color and clothing color is laughable. In short, we care even less than you guys do if someone has green eyes or blue, so I personally see it as a waste of time and frankly insulting that they would think we would only value their opinions based on factors that they can’t control and we can’t observe

Corporate virtue signalling.

If a single person did it I think that would be cool. But when every speaker at the conference does it it sends the message the company is telling them to. It erases the attempt to humanize the people on stage and reminds me they're not speaking from the heart, they're speaking from a script.

If I'm listening to the public unveiling of a new tech idea I'm not interested in your five inch killer heels, I'm interested in your technology. If I want to know about you as a person I'll read your Tinder profile.

I'd be more interested in what they were went to be there to say, and feel it's more about virtue signalling than anything else.

It is totally fine for me. I mean, it's some basic information you'd need to ask someone otherwise. And even though it doesn't interest me, these descriptions are usually quite short, so my time isn't wasted.
Edit: why should we care how conservative websites feel about accessibility? It's not like they care a lot about it when it's not let's troll the liberals / sjw time or whatever.

Useless

No. Its unnecessary. I dont think it was for us. I think they got back lash cause it's crazy and defensively said " we did it for those who cant see "

If it's important details... like maybe describing a product or reading out prompts. That's the only assistance I'd like. I dont wanna know the race. I dont wanna know your hair color or your dresses color.

Microsoft and many tech giants are rushing to cure blindness. I do commend them for such thankless actions but this.. THAT wasn't for us.

It is fun and gives me an idea of who the person is, but it isn’t too necessary.

I one or two sentences introduction providing a physical description and pronouns doesn’t seem like a bad thing.

I definitely like the inclusion of pronouns as you can’t always tell someone’s gender by name or voice (and not just if they happen to be trans; names that could belong to either gender, or non-English names).

Physical descriptions are less important unless it’s relevant to the presentation, eg knowing that the person presenting on racism is a person of colour. But a one sentence description isn’t going to take up that much time and can serve to give the person more character (the physical details that this person thinks are important about themselves are their Indian heritage and their killer heels).

If you’re taking more than one sentence to describe yourself, and it’s not relevant to the presentation, now you’re starting to waste my time and get annoying.

The other point is, if a company considers all they need to do is have conference presenters describe themselves, and that takes care of accessibility for blind people. Well, that’s a problem , and where it gets in to virtue signalling, and corporations doing the bare minimum. I don’t think that’s the case here because Microsoft has really stepped up its accessibility game in the last few years, and seems to actually care about it now in the products they make. So this seems more like a genuine effort at inclusion, rather than a preformative nonaction.

My opinion is that info on some screen that people can see is more important than all that fluff. I know a Trans man with a gender neutral name, so I can see pronouns might be useful is the voice pitch does not match the pronoun.

Personally I don't like this kind of thing because it makes me feel weirdly singled out while I'm just trying to mind my own business. I honestly don't care what you look like especially if you're a stranger to me.

I absolutely disagree with this practice. It is not done with input from the blind community. I look at it as performative inclusion. Do they also hire someone to translate in sign language for each presenter at every meeting? These "accessible introductions" have nothing to do with including the blind or visually impaired and it makes me incredibly uncomfortable knowing that this might become the norm. What someone looks like has nothing to do with their intellect, message, or character ... Just stop.

This is demeaning to EVERY person involved.

(I copied this from my reply on a different thread regarding the same exact practice)

Nic Fillingham said he’s a caucasian with glasses and a beard but he failed to mention that he also has a mohawk.

I’d appreciate if it was central to the story. Otherwise I might do fine without it. I’m guessing this is a conference on inclusion and diversity? Maybe it makes sense then.

But this brings up so many questions about descriptions being objective. Does anyone describe themselves as overweight or old or whatever is obvious but deemed undesirable in general society? This is reaching a bit but imagine a person with facial disfigurement on stage at one of these events. It’s obvious to every sighted person in the audience but the speaker doesn’t want to bring it up. I’d feel bad for them for having to awkwardly describe themself, the audience who are probably squirming in their seats, and finally the blind person who is missing out on not only the description but the situation.

I'd recall something like "5-inch heels" now if that was also written somewhere so I could search for it all the better. "MS presenter Indian descent with high heels" got me to their presentation. I'm all for it. People boff on names all the time...

Should it, shouldn’t it? Well, I was previously sighted and still visualise my environment and how someone looks. I don’t mind this idea, as long as it isn’t OTT, as it helps to personalise the experience, rather than just a “voice” of unknown origin.
Okay, overlap if you are sighted, but I appreciate presenters that describe images, charts, graphics on screen if it helps to understand the content.
Courses for horses I suppose 😊

I have some sight so this is not useful to me and is mildly annoying. Is the idea here that everyone should start introducing themselves this way just in case someone can't see? It feels like a satire of itself. If it is helpful to those with little or no sight, then I can't object too strongly. But I just wonder, why is it important or useful to know what someone looks like? Sure, if I'm looking to hire a model or actor where appearance is part of the product, that's one thing. But when the focus is supposed to be ideas, what does knowing what someone is wearing or their hair color do for me? It feels like a distraction and a waste of energy.

It's like the recent change in sports where "disabled list" became "injured list". I'm sure a lot of time and energy went into that change with some good intentions behind it. But I'm thinking, what if that energy was spent thinking of ways to make sports easier to consume for people with disabilities, like more/better accessible seating at games, audio description services, etc., instead of just changing a word and acting like, "Job well done, everyone is included now!"

Unprofessional at best, I dont give a shit about recommended pronouns. Its a technical presentation, keep the bullshit out of it. Such garbage.

Theoretically, you should be listening to what they have to say regardless of their hairstyle! Quite don't get what they look like should matter for anyone sighted or not.

They should get down to describing their slide decks, then. I guess no one thinks about those.

Get on with the conference please. It's definitely woke!!

A big strong hell to the no on this one.

First of all, our pronoun is our own business and personal choice. Secondly, unless we interact with said person, their pronoun and description is not at all relevant. Third of all, it's unnecessary, and a waste of time for sighted. If it was blindness specific, I would still have to say no, but would be less awkward.

Unfortunately, as others have said as well, this isn't done for the blind. It is done to tick a tick box of we care and look out for people. They can tick the LGBT and visually impaired communities. Even more unfortunately, some of us with all the overwelming evidence that's out there, we have a pretty good idea of what this is going for.

Look at all the rainbows on police cars, kids being able to define their pronoun in Scotland, and overwrite parental consent in certain medical situations. And it won't stop here.

[deleted]

Now I'm just pissed that I can't see what that sleeveless top is packing....🤷🏿‍♀️

Also can't focus now👇🏿

$1

I have decent central vision so would find it unnecessary but I can see how some may find it helpful.