[access-uk] Re: Chancing the cards?
- From: "Iain Lackie" <ilackie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 14:27:32 -0000
the really annoying thing about this is that there is such a disparity between
the price of large print playing cards and Braille. I don’t really believe it
myself, but it adds fuel to those who say RNIB isn’t actually really as
concerned with the “blind”, I.e. those who have no sight, as it should be. the
same is true with regard to easy-to-se as opposed to tactile watches.
Iain
From: Eleanor Burke
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 12:40 PM
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Chancing the cards?
RNIB prices seem a lot higher than the same products elsewhere.
----- Original Message -----
From: Tom
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 12:18 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Chancing the cards?
I've just had a look at the Sense website and they are offering a set of
brailled playing cards for £2 94.
Oddly enough the supplier is the RNIB.
The Sense website seems to be up to date but the playing card offer might be
out of date, but might still be worth looking into.
http://www.sense.org.uk/help_and_advice/people_who_are_deafblind/equipment_and_accessibility/games/large_print_braille_cards
Tom.
----- Original Message -----
From: Ibrahim Gucukoglu
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 12:06 PM
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Chancing the cards?
Hi Mike.
I have a set of playing cards which must be 15 years old or more, I’ve had
them since I was a child and used them regularly. The cards come in a sturdy
cardboard box and the braille dots though very faint on some of them are still
quite legible. If RNIB are putting braille cards in a tin to protect the dots
and they think this is an acceptable reason to charge over double what the
print cards sell for, they’re clearly desperate to add value to these to
justify the price. The packaging makes little or no difference to the cards
since if you use them on a regular basis the dots will become flattened and
fainter over time anyway, a tin isn’t going to make the slightest difference to
that. If RNIB were to sell a set of plastic like cards which were robust and
sturdy instead of the flimsy cardboard ones they sell, then I could perhaps
justify spending that on a set. As you say though, I’m probably going to have
to buy a decent set myself and have them brailed with sighted assistance.
All the best, Ibrahim.
From: Mike Moore
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 11:36 AM
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [access-uk] Re: Chancing the cards?
Ibrahim,
Obviously you have failed to take into regard the high quality box the
cards come in..... though it is to protect the less than sufficient quality of
the playing cards, so the bumps don't get flattened!!
It's a sod, but I agree with Peter, buy a good quality set of cards, the
vinyl ones which will give a good sharpness of Braille and mark them yourself.
You can also come up with a better system of ID..
Kindest,
Mike
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Ibrahim Gucukoglu
Sent: 05 February 2012 10:11
To: access-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [access-uk] Chancing the cards?
Hi Everyone.
I know we’ve discussed games on here in the past, so I thought I’d raise
this issue as it raises my hackles somewhat. I was on the RNIB online shop
this morning looking for brailed playing cards, and was shocked to discover
that these cards cost £7.26, while the standard printed cards cost less than
half this at £3.5. For an organisation that claims to promote equal access,
this is hardly an encouragement to take up a new hobbies or interest as it
penalises those of us who must use braille. A couple of sets of these cards
would set me back a Wapping £14.5, an outrageous amount of money considering
that the work required to adapt these cards IE putting a suit and numeric
denominator on each hardly merits such an inflated price. Thoughts anyone?
All the best, Ibrahim.
Other related posts:
