Update sidebarOrgPolitics.md

Author: Myndex

sidebarOrgPolitics.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ Some of this has impacted the internal politics of the W3C's AGWG, inflaming an
 
 The nature of the problems with WCAG 2 SCs 1.4.3 and 1.4.11, if elevated to law, result in the blocking of improved and more accessible visual content guidelines. This is due partly to the poorly conceived _"backwards compatible"_ rule of WCAG 2.x, which demands that passing a future version automatically passes a former version—a nonsensical stipulation that literally blocks progress and emerging technologies—**not to mention blocking the correction of errors or mistakes, as is the case with the significantly incorrect 1.4.3 & 1.4.11.** 
 
-### Don't be led astray, WCAG 2.x SCs 1.4.3 & 1.4.11 are not fit for purpose.
+### Don't be led astray, WCAG 1.4.3 & 1.4.11 are not fit for purpose.
 These two SCs directly affect the vast majority of visual web content, yet neither is supported by science, nor peer review, nor testing. WCAG 2's contrast math/methods do not support actual accessibility, and in fact can result in conditions that are worse for those with color vision deficiencies. The understanding docs of WCAG 2.x contain false or misleading information, and the premise lacks scientific support. 1.4.3 and 1.4.11 should not be incorporated into any laws nor regulations. This could be said of a few other SCs, but these two in particular have resulted in the greatest misunderstandings, and the greatest harm to users and readability.
 
 A critical view of a particular group's actions here and elsewhere, clearly reveal a motivation to obstruct the progress toward correcting these errors in WCAG 2. This cannot be allowed to stand. Fixing the significant problems of web content readability is one we take seriously, as is evidenced by our continued development of free-to-use guidelines and technologies.