The "proper" approach to this is 'progressive enhancement', ie. that every site is already a text only version. Then, on top of that, you can add images, stylesheets, Javascript, etc. as necessary. This used to work well, since that was also the easiest approach to building a site (unless you used Flash...)
I think frameworks have inverted things: the easiest approach these days is to load the default config of some framework/CMS, which will make heavy use of Javascript/images/CSS/etc. in order to entice developers to use it (otherwise, why use a framework at all ;) ). In this world, turning off a feature takes more effort than leaving it on, and we end up with ideas like special "text only" alternatives.
I think there's definitely a burden on the developers of frameworks to make them degrade as gracefully as possible. Of course, this isn't always possible (especially those designed to be completely in client-side JS), but in those instances where it is possible, it can have a large impact. For example, if the developer of some popular Wordpress theme spent a little extra effort on graceful fallbacks, it would improve the situation for all sites using that theme.
Disclaimer: I used to develop a CMS with crazy-strict adherence to, among other things, accessibility standards ;)
What CMS do you develop? This sounds like something I would use.
I always browse with cookies and Javascript disabled. There are very few sites I'll enable one or both to use. Most of the time, the first time I browse a site that requires Javascript to show anything useful I just leave. If you can't make your pitch with text, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to be interested.
I know, I know...I'm not the typical market for those kinds of sites.
I was a developer of http://ocportal.com a few years ago. I can't take much credit for it though, since my contribution was a drop in the ocean compared to that of Chris Graham.
I think frameworks have inverted things: the easiest approach these days is to load the default config of some framework/CMS, which will make heavy use of Javascript/images/CSS/etc. in order to entice developers to use it (otherwise, why use a framework at all ;) ). In this world, turning off a feature takes more effort than leaving it on, and we end up with ideas like special "text only" alternatives.
I think there's definitely a burden on the developers of frameworks to make them degrade as gracefully as possible. Of course, this isn't always possible (especially those designed to be completely in client-side JS), but in those instances where it is possible, it can have a large impact. For example, if the developer of some popular Wordpress theme spent a little extra effort on graceful fallbacks, it would improve the situation for all sites using that theme.
Disclaimer: I used to develop a CMS with crazy-strict adherence to, among other things, accessibility standards ;)