system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
cmv: We should still do social events, even if they are not accessible to everyone.

Bottom Line Up Front:
“If it isn’t accessible to everyone, it isn’t accessible to anyone.” is a really good tagline, and a really good idealistic goal, but the fact that something isn’t accessible to everyone shouldn’t stop us from doing things.

Context: I tend to be at the table, or at least in the room, for event planning…a lot.  Usually I either started the thing because it was an event i was looking for and it didn’t exist (I.e. local gaming group or celebration) or something someone felt I could help with (I.e. planning a local parade or community party).

I believe I understand that how these things are setup or run can be exclusive.  For example when we setup our local gaming group we eliminated game shops where the game room was only accessible via stairs.  We found places that have elevators or game rooms on a main floor.

What I struggle with is the idea that we shouldn’t even have these in-person gaming events because we don’t have an audio-visual system setup to allow people who (tragically) are home-bound to attend virtually…and we don’t have spaces set aside for folks who have sensory issues…and we don’t have an ASL interpreter for folks who can’t hear…and a narrator for folks who can’t see…

I would LOVE to be able to ensure everyone can take full enjoyment and participation at every event I’m a part of, but that simply isn’t within my capabilities.  Many people, from experts to everyday people are saying we shouldn’t do it at all, because “if it isn’t accessible to everyone, it isn’t accessible to anyone”.

Obviously it IS accessible to some folks, but I fully admit it isn’t fair or equitable.

But what is the solution?

This feels like a false dichotomy:
Since not everyone can go to game night, nobody should go to game night.
Since not everyone can hike, nobody should join hiking clubs.
Since not everyone is comfortable around animals, nobody should have pets.

Obviously there are differing levels of ridiculous and understandable points here.

For example, I do think tax money should not be spent directly on things that aren’t able to be enjoyed by a majority of the taxpayers (e.g. if a city builds a stadium, they should make sure it is accessible; if a township wants to host a picnic, they should make sure the members of their township are able to attend).

I feel like I’m missing something and I REALLY want to understand where reality meets ideology.  I would absolutely love to have a game night where everyone can participate…but I don’t have that ability…should I really NOT do any game nights at all?  I don’t think that’s reasonable.
gpt
Tax funded events should certainly be accessible to everyone who helped pay those taxes.
If you contributed, you should be allowed to participate.

For personal events that aren't tax funded, do what you conveniently can. If you want to set up a game night because there isn't one locally, DO IT. Doesn't matter if it's accessible to everyone.

Accessibility is nice, but should only be required for people who contributed imo.

If a bunch of people pull money from their own pockets to set up a game night, you cannot expect them to dish out more out of pocket money to make sure it is accessible. 

"We have $1000, we can make it happen for $1000, but to make it accessible would cost $1500."
That doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, that just means they can't make it accessible. 
But if one of those people contributing to that $1000 is in a wheelchair, it would be very wrong to not make it accessible to him, as it only happened because of him.