I don't think that's an apposite comparison for a number of reasons, but the most succinct is this: the "distinctive character" to which I'm referring to is not based on the idea of "no disabled people allowed," as it was at those schools. (If that was the idea, the con is doing a particularly bad job of implementing it, as very seriously disabled people have successfully attended the con every year.) I don't speak for the concom in any way, but I'm 100% sure if they could wave a magic wand and arrange to have everyone's accessibility needs met without seriously changing what I perceive to be one of the main purposes of the con (presenting vids in an atmosphere of maximum creative and critical freedom, and in an optimum format for viewing) or exhausting the con's resources, they absolutely would. No question.

You're right that comparisons are risky and can be more illuminating than helpful, but let me offer another one: due to a propensity to vasovagal syncope in hot weather, it's not feasible for me to go on any sort of trekking adventure in the tropical parts of the world, where part of the fun and the challenge is taking the risk of battling a demanding physical environment with minimal support. I don't therefore consider that kind of experience unjustly exclusionary or criticize other people for doing it. I think about how incredibly fucking annoying it is that my body has decided that maintaining proper blood supply to my head is something it can give up on if it doesn't feel like it. Making a space for people to voluntarily engage in a risky activity is not *inherently* bad just because it's not suitable for everyone.