If usability tickets are closed because the company doesn't want to bother, then maybe these gears deserve to have sand put in them.

I generally approve of subversive actions which are naturally damaging if and exactly if the accusation they are based on is true.

That is, the logic is something like "well, either it gets fixed, in which case it's a victory for good, or they're hypocrites who don't really care, in which case 1. it wastes their time and 2. they deserve to have their time wasted."

Is PaulHoule filing tickets with other browser vendors?

Is the point to target Mozilla, or to actually make a difference in accessibility?

Why would he file tickets with browsers he does not use?

And my whole point is that a strategy can have multiple effects. As I understand it:

- Firefox care about usability => the issues get fixed or at least considered.

- Firefox don't care about usability => sand in the gears.

So it's a hybrid strategy whose purpose depends on the situation.

I dunno. I don't personally report many bugs in public software...

But reporting real problems because you are annoyed that problems keep appearing and don't get fixed doesn't look like a societal hurting behavior to me. It does look like personally hurting, but antagonizing the author because of this is a real societal hurting behavior.