Correct me if I am wrong though, I believe, usually, that presentations are meant to be shown on a stage of some sort. I don't see how accessibility comes into play here.
What I often see is that presentations at conferences/meetups, etc are not shared at all. Rather than giving props to gmarty you complain about accessibility.
He made an effort to create a great looking presentations and, instead of a compliment, he gets criticised for not adhering to a 'better' technological and user experience standard to achieve it. The irony being that if he'd have opted to not share at all, there wouldn't have been a user experience problem to begin with.
> The irony being that if he'd have opted to not share at all, there wouldn't have been a user experience problem to begin with.
This isn't what GP asserted, this is a hyperbole.
GP is just making a suggestion to improve the software. You can take the suggestion for granted, comment on it, ignore it, you can up- and downvote it even. Just like you can do on GitHub or one of its competitors. You could even take it into account during a major overhaul.
If you can't even give honest feedback [1] on creative works we end up in a world of self-censorship. Compare it to how you're not allowed to give a negative reference in Germany. The difference then becomes in how positive people are raving about the employee. Pretty soon, you get a fake society where you supposedly fake it until you make it. I'd rather have brutal sincerity. Its more realistic and easier to process therefore more efficient.
Please, if my code sucks, tell me so, and tell me where you think I could improve. Heck, send me a patch or clone my git repo. I thrive on criticism as long as its constructive instead of destructive. The comment of GP is constructive.
[1] In this case a suggestion for improvement.
People should not do things to receive compliments.
If they receive a compliment, they may feel better for a second. How much further does that take them?
Criticism should be welcomed, not fought.
If the person used text instead of images, this knowledge would be easier to spread around to people who have eye problems, for example, and perhaps even for search engine optimisation. They'd be known in a bigger circle. At the cost of a bit more effort, perhaps.
It's up to the person who gives the presentation to decide whether this effort is worth it. But they would NOT be hurt by criticism. If they are, that's a big problem.
However, if they never see the criticism, they would have fewer opportunities to improve.
Giving a compliment is giving a fish. Giving criticism is helping someone fish better.
But do you think that that fighting all criticism is healthy?
How do you define who is an asshole? What is "hyper"critical? I would naturally argue that you are a hypocrite.
The slides seem to just be bitmaps so they could also just attach alt text to them...
If you pick "React.js 2013 slides" from the dropdown, it becomes clear why it looks like this.