#cwalttextmeta — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #cwalttextmeta, aggregated by home.social.
-
CW: Account getting away with way subpar alt-texts only because it's too niche with too few followers; CW: long (over 1,700 characters), Fediverse meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, character limit meta
I've just discovered a certain Mastodon account that seems to automatically post images of Second Life avatars. It can be lucky to only have eight followers, one of them being a search engine, the others being Second Life users.
If it had more follower, it would certainly already have met the wrath of the wider Mastodon community, especially the Mastodon HOA, for breaking Mastodon's unwritten rules.
And I'm not even talking about nigh-nudity in some of the images with no warning, no image flagging, no hashtag. I'm talking about the alt-texts that are vastly below Mastodon's requirements and quality standards for alt-texts.
Granted, all things considered, the requirements for good image descriptions by Mastodon's standards have to be extremely hard and tedious to meet, at least by my personal estimations. In fact, they have to be impossible to meet on Mastodon itself due to its tiny character limit, and if this account was somewhere where it could meet these requirements, it'd probably be blocked by loads of Mastodon accounts for its excessively long posts due to the long image descriptions.
But if more Mastodon users knew it right now, it'd probably be blocked by many more Mastodon accounts than follow it.
If you post from virtual worlds into the Fediverse, you simply cannot win in the long run. You'll lose either way.
#SecondLife #Metaverse #VirtualWorld #VirtualWorlds #Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #Mastodon #MastodonHOA #MastodonCulture -
CW: Alt-texts for profile images probably becoming mandatory, image descriptions for images in Mastodon link previews probably becoming mandatory, probably even for non-Mastodon users; CW: long (almost 4,500 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, ableism meta
More and more Mastodon users are acting like alt-texts for profile images are becoming mandatory Fediverse-wide. Never mind that they're currently being rolled out by and by and only on Mastodon even.
Here on Hubzilla, they aren't even a thought, also because Hubzilla doesn't know the concept of images having their own dedicated alt-text database field. (Before you ask: Hubzilla handles images and therefore alt-texts in messages vastly differently from Mastodon to begin with.)
At the same time, more and more Mastodon users are acting like image descriptions for the images in the link previews that are generated automatically in Mastodon timelines are becoming mandatory Fediverse-wide. Never mind that Mastodon itself has barely got enough character capacity to describe these preview images at the high level of detail that so many Mastodon users love, what with its meagre default character limit of 500.
Also, never mind that you'll have to edit your post to describe the preview image because it only appears after you've tooted your toot, so you can't see it before you toot your toot.
Also, never mind that everyone outside Hubzilla will get an image description for an image that's entirely absent because they don't have Mastodon-style link previews, because these link previews are a Mastodon-only thing.
Again, this is even worse here on Hubzilla. Unlike Mastodon, Hubzilla has a preview button that lets you look at your message before you actually send it. But Hubzilla doesn't generate link previews. And Hubzilla's preview button doesn't offer you the option to show you what your message will look like on Mastodon.
So I'd have to- write and send my message as usual
- switch to a tab with mastodon.social
- look for my message by using the hashtag search
- check whether Mastodon has generated a link preview, and if so, which image it has chosen
- find a copy of the image with the highest resolution possible;
alternatively, if it's an in-world image from OpenSim, log into OpenSim, travel to that place and take a close look at the place to write a highly detailed image description (takes from five hours to two days) - switch back to my Hubzilla tab
- edit my message
- add the image description
- re-count the characters in the message
- edit the message
- add a long post content warning with the current character count if there is none, and it isn't a comment; edit the character count of the existing long post content warning if there already is one
- save the edit
- discover that Mastodon hasn't recognised my edit as such, and now there are two copies of the same message on Mastodon, the old one without the image description and the new, longer one with the image description
All just to describe an image that isn't even there for my fellow Hubzilla users. Nor is it there for my contacts on Friendica, (streams), Forte, Misskey, Iceshrimp-JS, Iceshrimp.NET, Sharkey, Pleroma, Akkoma, snac2, GoToSocial, Hollo, Socialhome, Mitra, PieFed, Wafrn etc.
By the way, if a message comes from something else than Mastodon, and there's no actual link in it, Mastodon often creates a link preview for the profile or channel page of whoever has sent the message and picks their profile photo as the image for the link preview. Essentially, I'd have to reliably know when Mastodon does that, write two image descriptions for my profile photo (it's a rendering from OpenSim, and I always describe these twice; besides, people should have a shorter description next to my usual detailed description) and copy-paste both into each post for which Mastodon will generate a link preview for my channel page.
Fortunately, Mastodon doesn't show Hubzilla profiles or channels like Hubzilla itself shows them, and neither do Mastodon apps. Otherwise, if Mastodon users figure out that the background image of my channel is part of my channel customisation and not a default Hubzilla Web UI element, they may demand I add an alt-text for the background image, lest I be mass-blocked as an ableist.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Ableist #Ableism #AbleismMeta #CWAbleismMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #Fediverse #Mastodon #Hubzilla #MastodonCulture #FediverseCulture #MastodonCentricity #MastodonNormativity -
@TeflonTrout :bc: he/him @Sharp Leaves Still, forcing Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon literally everyone in the Fediverse is bad.
Maybe you haven't heard about this yet, but: The Fediverse is not only Mastodon. It has never been only Mastodon. It didn't even start with Mastodon. And it doesn't entirely work like Mastodon either.
For starters, this means that just because you see it on Mastodon, it didn't necessarily originate on Mastodon.
There are places in the Fediverse that are vastly older than Mastodon, and that are very different from Mastodon. Thus, they have their own culture, based on their own technology and their own features and where their users came from, and largely without any influences from Mastodon.
The oldest still existing server software in the Fediverse is not Mastodon from 2016. It's Friendica (https://friendi.ca, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendica, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Friendica). Friendica is essentially a mixture of a Facebook alternative and fully-featured long-form blogging. No Twitter or Mastodon influence anywhere. And Friendica first came out in May, 2010, five years and eight months before Mastodon.
Friendica did not intrude into the Mastodon Fediverse that was created by Eugen Rochko as a Mastodon-only network. Mastodon was born into an already existing Fediverse that consisted of at least Friendica, Hubzilla (https://hubzilla.org, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubzilla, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Hubzilla) and GNU social (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_social; now defunct).
Here's how Friendica differs from Mastodon in ways that may disturb Mastodon hardliners:- Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
Friendica doesn't have an arbitrary character limit; it's limited by the maximum size of the database field for the post text. Currently, this is 16,777,215 characters. Thus, Friendica doesn't have keeping messages short in its culture, it never has, and it never will. - Mastodon users tend to be eager to block anyone who doesn't cut long posts into pieces of no more than 500 characters each.
I know at least one Friendica veteran who blocks everyone upon first strike who does cut long posts into annoying strings of tiny chunks. - Mastodon introduced a CW field in 2017.
Friendica has had the exact same field as a summary/abstract field since its own beginning in 2010. That, and Friendica has always had a much more efficient way of handling CWs, one that Mastodon itself adopted with version 4.0 in October, 2022. Thus, by its technology and culture, Friendica users despise misusing their abstract field to force the same CW upon everyone out there with a hot, flaming passion.
So if you see someone "misusing" the CW field for "a subject or a summary or whatever that is," that might not be a clueless Mastodon user. Instead, it might be a Friendica user who has been around for a dozen years longer than you, who is used to living by Friendica's culture, and who knows tons more about the Fediverse than you do. - Friendica users are much less likely to add alt-texts to their images. That's for two reasons.
One, Friendica's culture is not an idealised version of pre-Musk, very-left-wing Twitter's culture. It does not include attacking and punishing everyone who doesn't add 100% hand-written, 100% accurate, sufficiently detailed alt-texts to their images.
Two, Friendica handles images drastically differently from Mastodon. Mastodon always has a nifty little entry field for alt-texts whenever you attach an image. On Friendica, images are embedded into posts rather than attached to them, like in a blog post. And oftentimes, you literally have to program the alt-text into the raw image embedding markup code. - On Mastodon, it's considered intrusive and reply-guying to reply to someone who hasn't mentioned you, and to whom you aren't mutually connected. You couldn't possibly have received the toot that you're replying to otherwise.
On Friendica, that's perfectly normal. Friendica doesn't show you single messages by default. It always shows you the entire conversation thread, all the way up to the start post, with all branches. Thus, neither Friendica's technology nor Friendica's culture rules out replying to any comment in the thread. - Mastodon has only just introduced Twitter-style quote-posts a few months ago. With a safety feature that only works on Mastodon and GoToSocial for fear of that feature being used for harassment and dogpiling just like on Twitter. And because literally everyone on Mastodon comes from Twitter, it's actually being used for harassment and dogpiling.
Friendica has had that very same feature since its inception in 2010, over a decade and a half longer. It has never not had this feature. It has always been able to quote-post any public message in the Fediverse. But since Friendica is not entirely populated by former Twitter users, it hasn't been used for harassment or dogpiling even once. It's only used to forward content. For most of the time, it literally was the only available way to forward a message. - Mastodon users tend to be very protective and defensive about their allegedly Mastodon-only Fediverse.
Friendica users are used to being able to connect with everything that moves and then some. It's one of Friendica's key features that it speaks a whole lot of protocols, not just ActivityPub.
Whereas Mastodon users see Mastodon as a "decentralised walled garden", Friendica users see Friendica as the gateway to the whole federated social Web plus some places that aren't, strictly speaking, federated. - Mastodon users will staunchly insist that "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" essentially mean the same because they believe they do. They will attack anyone who claims otherwise.
Friendica users will staunchly insist that there's a huge difference between "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" because they actually know there is one. They will lecture anyone who claims otherwise.
Of course, from a Mastodon point of view, it's both tempting and fully justified to tell the Friendica users that this is the Mastodon Fediverse, and that they will have to adapt the Mastodon culture and abolish their own culture or be thrown out. But for one, Mastodon's culture doesn't fit Friendica's technology.
Besides, that'd literally be like European settlers holding Native Americans at gunpoint and forcing them to give up their own culture, adopt European culture and convert to Catholic Christianity or else. The only difference is that European settlers, unlike the Mastodon users, did not think that they were there first, and that everyone else is an intruder.
I mean, sure, go ahead and attack anyone who doesn't strictly live by Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's rules if you think you have to. But prepare for a whole lot of defence and even counter-attacks from Pleroma, Akkoma, Misskey, Iceshrimp-JS, Iceshrimp.NET, Sharkey, GoToSocial, Hollo, snac2, Mitra, Socialhome, Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams), Forte and the rest of the non-Mastodon Fediverse.
CC: @Jan Wildeboer
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #QuotePost #QuotePosts #QuoteTweet #QuoteTweets #QuoteToot #QuoteToots #QuoteBoost #QuoteBoosts #QuotedShares #QuotePostDebate #QuoteTootDebate #Fediverse #Mastodon #Friendica #NotOnlyMastodon #FediverseIsNotMastodon #MastodonIsNotTheFediverse - Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
-
@TeflonTrout :bc: he/him @Sharp Leaves Still, forcing Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon literally everyone in the Fediverse is bad.
Maybe you haven't heard about this yet, but: The Fediverse is not only Mastodon. It has never been only Mastodon. It didn't even start with Mastodon. And it doesn't entirely work like Mastodon either.
For starters, this means that just because you see it on Mastodon, it didn't necessarily originate on Mastodon.
There are places in the Fediverse that are vastly older than Mastodon, and that are very different from Mastodon. Thus, they have their own culture, based on their own technology and their own features and where their users came from, and largely without any influences from Mastodon.
The oldest still existing server software in the Fediverse is not Mastodon from 2016. It's Friendica (https://friendi.ca, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendica, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Friendica). Friendica is essentially a mixture of a Facebook alternative and fully-featured long-form blogging. No Twitter or Mastodon influence anywhere. And Friendica first came out in May, 2010, five years and eight months before Mastodon.
Friendica did not intrude into the Mastodon Fediverse that was created by Eugen Rochko as a Mastodon-only network. Mastodon was born into an already existing Fediverse that consisted of at least Friendica, Hubzilla (https://hubzilla.org, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubzilla, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Hubzilla) and GNU social (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_social; now defunct).
Here's how Friendica differs from Mastodon in ways that may disturb Mastodon hardliners:- Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
Friendica doesn't have an arbitrary character limit; it's limited by the maximum size of the database field for the post text. Currently, this is 16,777,215 characters. Thus, Friendica doesn't have keeping messages short in its culture, it never has, and it never will. - Mastodon users tend to be eager to block anyone who doesn't cut long posts into pieces of no more than 500 characters each.
I know at least one Friendica veteran who blocks everyone upon first strike who does cut long posts into annoying strings of tiny chunks. - Mastodon introduced a CW field in 2017.
Friendica has had the exact same field as a summary/abstract field since its own beginning in 2010. That, and Friendica has always had a much more efficient way of handling CWs, one that Mastodon itself adopted with version 4.0 in October, 2022. Thus, by its technology and culture, Friendica users despise misusing their abstract field to force the same CW upon everyone out there with a hot, flaming passion.
So if you see someone "misusing" the CW field for "a subject or a summary or whatever that is," that might not be a clueless Mastodon user. Instead, it might be a Friendica user who has been around for a dozen years longer than you, who is used to living by Friendica's culture, and who knows tons more about the Fediverse than you do. - Friendica users are much less likely to add alt-texts to their images. That's for two reasons.
One, Friendica's culture is not an idealised version of pre-Musk, very-left-wing Twitter's culture. It does not include attacking and punishing everyone who doesn't add 100% hand-written, 100% accurate, sufficiently detailed alt-texts to their images.
Two, Friendica handles images drastically differently from Mastodon. Mastodon always has a nifty little entry field for alt-texts whenever you attach an image. On Friendica, images are embedded into posts rather than attached to them, like in a blog post. And oftentimes, you literally have to program the alt-text into the raw image embedding markup code. - On Mastodon, it's considered intrusive and reply-guying to reply to someone who hasn't mentioned you, and to whom you aren't mutually connected. You couldn't possibly have received the toot that you're replying to otherwise.
On Friendica, that's perfectly normal. Friendica doesn't show you single messages by default. It always shows you the entire conversation thread, all the way up to the start post, with all branches. Thus, neither Friendica's technology nor Friendica's culture rules out replying to any comment in the thread. - Mastodon has only just introduced Twitter-style quote-posts a few months ago. With a safety feature that only works on Mastodon and GoToSocial for fear of that feature being used for harassment and dogpiling just like on Twitter. And because literally everyone on Mastodon comes from Twitter, it's actually being used for harassment and dogpiling.
Friendica has had that very same feature since its inception in 2010, over a decade and a half longer. It has never not had this feature. It has always been able to quote-post any public message in the Fediverse. But since Friendica is not entirely populated by former Twitter users, it hasn't been used for harassment or dogpiling even once. It's only used to forward content. For most of the time, it literally was the only available way to forward a message. - Mastodon users tend to be very protective and defensive about their allegedly Mastodon-only Fediverse.
Friendica users are used to being able to connect with everything that moves and then some. It's one of Friendica's key features that it speaks a whole lot of protocols, not just ActivityPub.
Whereas Mastodon users see Mastodon as a "decentralised walled garden", Friendica users see Friendica as the gateway to the whole federated social Web plus some places that aren't, strictly speaking, federated. - Mastodon users will staunchly insist that "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" essentially mean the same because they believe they do. They will attack anyone who claims otherwise.
Friendica users will staunchly insist that there's a huge difference between "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" because they actually know there is one. They will lecture anyone who claims otherwise.
Of course, from a Mastodon point of view, it's both tempting and fully justified to tell the Friendica users that this is the Mastodon Fediverse, and that they will have to adapt the Mastodon culture and abolish their own culture or be thrown out. But for one, Mastodon's culture doesn't fit Friendica's technology.
Besides, that'd literally be like European settlers holding Native Americans at gunpoint and forcing them to give up their own culture, adopt European culture and convert to Catholic Christianity or else. The only difference is that European settlers, unlike the Mastodon users, did not think that they were there first, and that everyone else is an intruder.
I mean, sure, go ahead and attack anyone who doesn't strictly live by Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's rules if you think you have to. But prepare for a whole lot of defence and even counter-attacks from Pleroma, Akkoma, Misskey, Iceshrimp-JS, Iceshrimp.NET, Sharkey, GoToSocial, Hollo, snac2, Mitra, Socialhome, Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams), Forte and the rest of the non-Mastodon Fediverse.
CC: @Jan Wildeboer
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #QuotePost #QuotePosts #QuoteTweet #QuoteTweets #QuoteToot #QuoteToots #QuoteBoost #QuoteBoosts #QuotedShares #QuotePostDebate #QuoteTootDebate #Fediverse #Mastodon #Friendica #NotOnlyMastodon #FediverseIsNotMastodon #MastodonIsNotTheFediverse - Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
-
@TeflonTrout :bc: he/him @Sharp Leaves Still, forcing Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon literally everyone in the Fediverse is bad.
Maybe you haven't heard about this yet, but: The Fediverse is not only Mastodon. It has never been only Mastodon. It didn't even start with Mastodon. And it doesn't entirely work like Mastodon either.
For starters, this means that just because you see it on Mastodon, it didn't necessarily originate on Mastodon.
There are places in the Fediverse that are vastly older than Mastodon, and that are very different from Mastodon. Thus, they have their own culture, based on their own technology and their own features and where their users came from, and largely without any influences from Mastodon.
The oldest still existing server software in the Fediverse is not Mastodon from 2016. It's Friendica (https://friendi.ca, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendica, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Friendica). Friendica is essentially a mixture of a Facebook alternative and fully-featured long-form blogging. No Twitter or Mastodon influence anywhere. And Friendica first came out in May, 2010, five years and eight months before Mastodon.
Friendica did not intrude into the Mastodon Fediverse that was created by Eugen Rochko as a Mastodon-only network. Mastodon was born into an already existing Fediverse that consisted of at least Friendica, Hubzilla (https://hubzilla.org, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubzilla, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Hubzilla) and GNU social (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_social; now defunct).
Here's how Friendica differs from Mastodon in ways that may disturb Mastodon hardliners:- Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
Friendica doesn't have an arbitrary character limit; it's limited by the maximum size of the database field for the post text. Currently, this is 16,777,215 characters. Thus, Friendica doesn't have keeping messages short in its culture, it never has, and it never will. - Mastodon users tend to be eager to block anyone who doesn't cut long posts into pieces of no more than 500 characters each.
I know at least one Friendica veteran who blocks everyone upon first strike who does cut long posts into annoying strings of tiny chunks. - Mastodon introduced a CW field in 2017.
Friendica has had the exact same field as a summary/abstract field since its own beginning in 2010. That, and Friendica has always had a much more efficient way of handling CWs, one that Mastodon itself adopted with version 4.0 in October, 2022. Thus, by its technology and culture, Friendica users despise misusing their abstract field to force the same CW upon everyone out there with a hot, flaming passion.
So if you see someone "misusing" the CW field for "a subject or a summary or whatever that is," that might not be a clueless Mastodon user. Instead, it might be a Friendica user who has been around for a dozen years longer than you, who is used to living by Friendica's culture, and who knows tons more about the Fediverse than you do. - Friendica users are much less likely to add alt-texts to their images. That's for two reasons.
One, Friendica's culture is not an idealised version of pre-Musk, very-left-wing Twitter's culture. It does not include attacking and punishing everyone who doesn't add 100% hand-written, 100% accurate, sufficiently detailed alt-texts to their images.
Two, Friendica handles images drastically differently from Mastodon. Mastodon always has a nifty little entry field for alt-texts whenever you attach an image. On Friendica, images are embedded into posts rather than attached to them, like in a blog post. And oftentimes, you literally have to program the alt-text into the raw image embedding markup code. - On Mastodon, it's considered intrusive and reply-guying to reply to someone who hasn't mentioned you, and to whom you aren't mutually connected. You couldn't possibly have received the toot that you're replying to otherwise.
On Friendica, that's perfectly normal. Friendica doesn't show you single messages by default. It always shows you the entire conversation thread, all the way up to the start post, with all branches. Thus, neither Friendica's technology nor Friendica's culture rules out replying to any comment in the thread. - Mastodon has only just introduced Twitter-style quote-posts a few months ago. With a safety feature that only works on Mastodon and GoToSocial for fear of that feature being used for harassment and dogpiling just like on Twitter. And because literally everyone on Mastodon comes from Twitter, it's actually being used for harassment and dogpiling.
Friendica has had that very same feature since its inception in 2010, over a decade and a half longer. It has never not had this feature. It has always been able to quote-post any public message in the Fediverse. But since Friendica is not entirely populated by former Twitter users, it hasn't been used for harassment or dogpiling even once. It's only used to forward content. For most of the time, it literally was the only available way to forward a message. - Mastodon users tend to be very protective and defensive about their allegedly Mastodon-only Fediverse.
Friendica users are used to being able to connect with everything that moves and then some. It's one of Friendica's key features that it speaks a whole lot of protocols, not just ActivityPub.
Whereas Mastodon users see Mastodon as a "decentralised walled garden", Friendica users see Friendica as the gateway to the whole federated social Web plus some places that aren't, strictly speaking, federated. - Mastodon users will staunchly insist that "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" essentially mean the same because they believe they do. They will attack anyone who claims otherwise.
Friendica users will staunchly insist that there's a huge difference between "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" because they actually know there is one. They will lecture anyone who claims otherwise.
Of course, from a Mastodon point of view, it's both tempting and fully justified to tell the Friendica users that this is the Mastodon Fediverse, and that they will have to adapt the Mastodon culture and abolish their own culture or be thrown out. But for one, Mastodon's culture doesn't fit Friendica's technology.
Besides, that'd literally be like European settlers holding Native Americans at gunpoint and forcing them to give up their own culture, adopt European culture and convert to Catholic Christianity or else. The only difference is that European settlers, unlike the Mastodon users, did not think that they were there first, and that everyone else is an intruder.
I mean, sure, go ahead and attack anyone who doesn't strictly live by Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's rules if you think you have to. But prepare for a whole lot of defence and even counter-attacks from Pleroma, Akkoma, Misskey, Iceshrimp-JS, Iceshrimp.NET, Sharkey, GoToSocial, Hollo, snac2, Mitra, Socialhome, Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams), Forte and the rest of the non-Mastodon Fediverse.
CC: @Jan Wildeboer
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #QuotePost #QuotePosts #QuoteTweet #QuoteTweets #QuoteToot #QuoteToots #QuoteBoost #QuoteBoosts #QuotedShares #QuotePostDebate #QuoteTootDebate #Fediverse #Mastodon #Friendica #NotOnlyMastodon #FediverseIsNotMastodon #MastodonIsNotTheFediverse - Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
-
@TeflonTrout :bc: he/him @Sharp Leaves Still, forcing Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon literally everyone in the Fediverse is bad.
Maybe you haven't heard about this yet, but: The Fediverse is not only Mastodon. It has never been only Mastodon. It didn't even start with Mastodon. And it doesn't entirely work like Mastodon either.
For starters, this means that just because you see it on Mastodon, it didn't necessarily originate on Mastodon.
There are places in the Fediverse that are vastly older than Mastodon, and that are very different from Mastodon. Thus, they have their own culture, based on their own technology and their own features and where their users came from, and largely without any influences from Mastodon.
The oldest still existing server software in the Fediverse is not Mastodon from 2016. It's Friendica (https://friendi.ca, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendica, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Friendica). Friendica is essentially a mixture of a Facebook alternative and fully-featured long-form blogging. No Twitter or Mastodon influence anywhere. And Friendica first came out in May, 2010, five years and eight months before Mastodon.
Friendica did not intrude into the Mastodon Fediverse that was created by Eugen Rochko as a Mastodon-only network. Mastodon was born into an already existing Fediverse that consisted of at least Friendica, Hubzilla (https://hubzilla.org, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubzilla, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Hubzilla) and GNU social (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_social; now defunct).
Here's how Friendica differs from Mastodon in ways that may disturb Mastodon hardliners:- Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
Friendica doesn't have an arbitrary character limit; it's limited by the maximum size of the database field for the post text. Currently, this is 16,777,215 characters. Thus, Friendica doesn't have keeping messages short in its culture, it never has, and it never will. - Mastodon users tend to be eager to block anyone who doesn't cut long posts into pieces of no more than 500 characters each.
I know at least one Friendica veteran who blocks everyone upon first strike who does cut long posts into annoying strings of tiny chunks. - Mastodon introduced a CW field in 2017.
Friendica has had the exact same field as a summary/abstract field since its own beginning in 2010. That, and Friendica has always had a much more efficient way of handling CWs, one that Mastodon itself adopted with version 4.0 in October, 2022. Thus, by its technology and culture, Friendica users despise misusing their abstract field to force the same CW upon everyone out there with a hot, flaming passion.
So if you see someone "misusing" the CW field for "a subject or a summary or whatever that is," that might not be a clueless Mastodon user. Instead, it might be a Friendica user who has been around for a dozen years longer than you, who is used to living by Friendica's culture, and who knows tons more about the Fediverse than you do. - Friendica users are much less likely to add alt-texts to their images. That's for two reasons.
One, Friendica's culture is not an idealised version of pre-Musk, very-left-wing Twitter's culture. It does not include attacking and punishing everyone who doesn't add 100% hand-written, 100% accurate, sufficiently detailed alt-texts to their images.
Two, Friendica handles images drastically differently from Mastodon. Mastodon always has a nifty little entry field for alt-texts whenever you attach an image. On Friendica, images are embedded into posts rather than attached to them, like in a blog post. And oftentimes, you literally have to program the alt-text into the raw image embedding markup code. - On Mastodon, it's considered intrusive and reply-guying to reply to someone who hasn't mentioned you, and to whom you aren't mutually connected. You couldn't possibly have received the toot that you're replying to otherwise.
On Friendica, that's perfectly normal. Friendica doesn't show you single messages by default. It always shows you the entire conversation thread, all the way up to the start post, with all branches. Thus, neither Friendica's technology nor Friendica's culture rules out replying to any comment in the thread. - Mastodon has only just introduced Twitter-style quote-posts a few months ago. With a safety feature that only works on Mastodon and GoToSocial for fear of that feature being used for harassment and dogpiling just like on Twitter. And because literally everyone on Mastodon comes from Twitter, it's actually being used for harassment and dogpiling.
Friendica has had that very same feature since its inception in 2010, over a decade and a half longer. It has never not had this feature. It has always been able to quote-post any public message in the Fediverse. But since Friendica is not entirely populated by former Twitter users, it hasn't been used for harassment or dogpiling even once. It's only used to forward content. For most of the time, it literally was the only available way to forward a message. - Mastodon users tend to be very protective and defensive about their allegedly Mastodon-only Fediverse.
Friendica users are used to being able to connect with everything that moves and then some. It's one of Friendica's key features that it speaks a whole lot of protocols, not just ActivityPub.
Whereas Mastodon users see Mastodon as a "decentralised walled garden", Friendica users see Friendica as the gateway to the whole federated social Web plus some places that aren't, strictly speaking, federated. - Mastodon users will staunchly insist that "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" essentially mean the same because they believe they do. They will attack anyone who claims otherwise.
Friendica users will staunchly insist that there's a huge difference between "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" because they actually know there is one. They will lecture anyone who claims otherwise.
Of course, from a Mastodon point of view, it's both tempting and fully justified to tell the Friendica users that this is the Mastodon Fediverse, and that they will have to adapt the Mastodon culture and abolish their own culture or be thrown out. But for one, Mastodon's culture doesn't fit Friendica's technology.
Besides, that'd literally be like European settlers holding Native Americans at gunpoint and forcing them to give up their own culture, adopt European culture and convert to Catholic Christianity or else. The only difference is that European settlers, unlike the Mastodon users, did not think that they were there first, and that everyone else is an intruder.
I mean, sure, go ahead and attack anyone who doesn't strictly live by Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's rules if you think you have to. But prepare for a whole lot of defence and even counter-attacks from Pleroma, Akkoma, Misskey, Iceshrimp-JS, Iceshrimp.NET, Sharkey, GoToSocial, Hollo, snac2, Mitra, Socialhome, Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams), Forte and the rest of the non-Mastodon Fediverse.
CC: @Jan Wildeboer
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #QuotePost #QuotePosts #QuoteTweet #QuoteTweets #QuoteToot #QuoteToots #QuoteBoost #QuoteBoosts #QuotedShares #QuotePostDebate #QuoteTootDebate #Fediverse #Mastodon #Friendica #NotOnlyMastodon #FediverseIsNotMastodon #MastodonIsNotTheFediverse - Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
-
@TeflonTrout :bc: he/him @Sharp Leaves Still, forcing Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon literally everyone in the Fediverse is bad.
Maybe you haven't heard about this yet, but: The Fediverse is not only Mastodon. It has never been only Mastodon. It didn't even start with Mastodon. And it doesn't entirely work like Mastodon either.
For starters, this means that just because you see it on Mastodon, it didn't necessarily originate on Mastodon.
There are places in the Fediverse that are vastly older than Mastodon, and that are very different from Mastodon. Thus, they have their own culture, based on their own technology and their own features and where their users came from, and largely without any influences from Mastodon.
The oldest still existing server software in the Fediverse is not Mastodon from 2016. It's Friendica (https://friendi.ca, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendica, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Friendica). Friendica is essentially a mixture of a Facebook alternative and fully-featured long-form blogging. No Twitter or Mastodon influence anywhere. And Friendica first came out in May, 2010, five years and eight months before Mastodon.
Friendica did not intrude into the Mastodon Fediverse that was created by Eugen Rochko as a Mastodon-only network. Mastodon was born into an already existing Fediverse that consisted of at least Friendica, Hubzilla (https://hubzilla.org, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubzilla, https://joinfediverse.wiki/Hubzilla) and GNU social (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_social; now defunct).
Here's how Friendica differs from Mastodon in ways that may disturb Mastodon hardliners:- Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
Friendica doesn't have an arbitrary character limit; it's limited by the maximum size of the database field for the post text. Currently, this is 16,777,215 characters. Thus, Friendica doesn't have keeping messages short in its culture, it never has, and it never will. - Mastodon users tend to be eager to block anyone who doesn't cut long posts into pieces of no more than 500 characters each.
I know at least one Friendica veteran who blocks everyone upon first strike who does cut long posts into annoying strings of tiny chunks. - Mastodon introduced a CW field in 2017.
Friendica has had the exact same field as a summary/abstract field since its own beginning in 2010. That, and Friendica has always had a much more efficient way of handling CWs, one that Mastodon itself adopted with version 4.0 in October, 2022. Thus, by its technology and culture, Friendica users despise misusing their abstract field to force the same CW upon everyone out there with a hot, flaming passion.
So if you see someone "misusing" the CW field for "a subject or a summary or whatever that is," that might not be a clueless Mastodon user. Instead, it might be a Friendica user who has been around for a dozen years longer than you, who is used to living by Friendica's culture, and who knows tons more about the Fediverse than you do. - Friendica users are much less likely to add alt-texts to their images. That's for two reasons.
One, Friendica's culture is not an idealised version of pre-Musk, very-left-wing Twitter's culture. It does not include attacking and punishing everyone who doesn't add 100% hand-written, 100% accurate, sufficiently detailed alt-texts to their images.
Two, Friendica handles images drastically differently from Mastodon. Mastodon always has a nifty little entry field for alt-texts whenever you attach an image. On Friendica, images are embedded into posts rather than attached to them, like in a blog post. And oftentimes, you literally have to program the alt-text into the raw image embedding markup code. - On Mastodon, it's considered intrusive and reply-guying to reply to someone who hasn't mentioned you, and to whom you aren't mutually connected. You couldn't possibly have received the toot that you're replying to otherwise.
On Friendica, that's perfectly normal. Friendica doesn't show you single messages by default. It always shows you the entire conversation thread, all the way up to the start post, with all branches. Thus, neither Friendica's technology nor Friendica's culture rules out replying to any comment in the thread. - Mastodon has only just introduced Twitter-style quote-posts a few months ago. With a safety feature that only works on Mastodon and GoToSocial for fear of that feature being used for harassment and dogpiling just like on Twitter. And because literally everyone on Mastodon comes from Twitter, it's actually being used for harassment and dogpiling.
Friendica has had that very same feature since its inception in 2010, over a decade and a half longer. It has never not had this feature. It has always been able to quote-post any public message in the Fediverse. But since Friendica is not entirely populated by former Twitter users, it hasn't been used for harassment or dogpiling even once. It's only used to forward content. For most of the time, it literally was the only available way to forward a message. - Mastodon users tend to be very protective and defensive about their allegedly Mastodon-only Fediverse.
Friendica users are used to being able to connect with everything that moves and then some. It's one of Friendica's key features that it speaks a whole lot of protocols, not just ActivityPub.
Whereas Mastodon users see Mastodon as a "decentralised walled garden", Friendica users see Friendica as the gateway to the whole federated social Web plus some places that aren't, strictly speaking, federated. - Mastodon users will staunchly insist that "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" essentially mean the same because they believe they do. They will attack anyone who claims otherwise.
Friendica users will staunchly insist that there's a huge difference between "Fediverse" and "Mastodon" because they actually know there is one. They will lecture anyone who claims otherwise.
Of course, from a Mastodon point of view, it's both tempting and fully justified to tell the Friendica users that this is the Mastodon Fediverse, and that they will have to adapt the Mastodon culture and abolish their own culture or be thrown out. But for one, Mastodon's culture doesn't fit Friendica's technology.
Besides, that'd literally be like European settlers holding Native Americans at gunpoint and forcing them to give up their own culture, adopt European culture and convert to Catholic Christianity or else. The only difference is that European settlers, unlike the Mastodon users, did not think that they were there first, and that everyone else is an intruder.
I mean, sure, go ahead and attack anyone who doesn't strictly live by Mastodon's culture and Mastodon's rules if you think you have to. But prepare for a whole lot of defence and even counter-attacks from Pleroma, Akkoma, Misskey, Iceshrimp-JS, Iceshrimp.NET, Sharkey, GoToSocial, Hollo, snac2, Mitra, Socialhome, Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams), Forte and the rest of the non-Mastodon Fediverse.
CC: @Jan Wildeboer
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #QuotePost #QuotePosts #QuoteTweet #QuoteTweets #QuoteToot #QuoteToots #QuoteBoost #QuoteBoosts #QuotedShares #QuotePostDebate #QuoteTootDebate #Fediverse #Mastodon #Friendica #NotOnlyMastodon #FediverseIsNotMastodon #MastodonIsNotTheFediverse - Mastodon is hard-coded to 500 characters. This character limit is deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture.
-
@🌱🏴🅰️🏳️⚧️🐧🔧📎 Ambiyelp I'm not talking about the visual description in the alt-text.
I'm talking about a wholly separate explanation in the post text body. Like, where you'd write the actual toot. Where you probably only have 500 characters. Where you wrote the above comment. It's there where I want to put the explanation.
The story behind this is as follows:
I keep reading from Mastodon users that alt-texts (yes, actual alt-texts in this case) are useful for sighted people, too, because alt-texts can give them explanations and help them understand what they're looking at. This means that images must not only be described, but also explained if necessary.
On the one hand, I keep telling Mastodon users again and again that explanations do not belong into the alt-text because there are people who can't access and read alt-texts; Mastodon users tend to be very defensive of using alt-texts to extend their 500-character limit by another 1,500 characters per image.
Still, on the other hand, this means that especially Mastodon users want images that they don't understand to come with explanations right away. In particular, neurodivergent people often need explanations, in-depth explanations even. It appears to have gotten to a point where posting an image that needs explanations without explanations is considered just as careless and almost as ableist as posting an image without accurate and sufficiently detailed alt-text.
At the same time, whenever I post an image of any kind, memes included, they're about such obscure topics that they need an explanation. Also, not everyone is always familiar with every meme template, so I have to give an explanation for the meme templates I've used as well. So I always explain whatever might need to be explained.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Ableist #Ableism #AbleismMeta #CWAbleismMeta -
@DopeGhoti @Andrew How many characters would be sufficient for Mastodon to not count as ableist anymore?
If you say, 1,500, who or what says that 1,500 characters are sufficient to describe any and all images, but a lower limit is not?
For comparison, look at my cover photo. The one with the weird building. I have a post with just about the same image in it; here's the link.
In this post, the image has two separate image descriptions. One is in the alt-text. The alt-text is exactly 1,500 characters long, a bit over 1,400 of which are image description. And that's the short description. It doesn't even have room for any text transcripts. It actually isn't much more than an "alibi description". It's only there because many people on Mastodon demand there be a 100% accurate and sufficiently detailed image description in the alt-text of each image in the Fediverse.
Only that "sufficiently detailed" isn't always possible even in 1,500 characters.
That's why there is an additional long description in the post text. It's sufficiently detailed, as in, fully detailed. An image like this requires a fully detailed description. It comes with transcripts of all bits of text within the borders of the image, and it comes with all explanations necessary to understand the image and the description. It's over 60,000 characters long.
Yes, over 60,000 characters in one post. Your character limit is 500. Mine is over 16 million.
Oh, and yes, it's guaranteed to be 100% hand-written. It took me two full days, morning to evening, to research for and write the long description with literally absolutely no help from any AI whatsoever. In fact, I've described details that no AI on the planet will ever be able to see in the image.
So ideally, all Fediverse server platforms should have two image description fields for each profile image, one being the alt-text behind the image, one being a long description next to the image. The latter should not have an arbitrarily-chosen character limit.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Ableist #Ableism #AbleismMeta #CWAbleismMeta -
CW: Gute Bildbeschreibungen bringen einen sehr viel größeren Aufwand mit sich, als ihr vielleicht glaubt; CW: lang (über 6.000 Zeichen), Fediverse-Meta, Fediverse-über-Mastodon-hinaus-Meta, Zeichenlimit-Meta, Inhaltswarnungen-Meta/Content-Warning-Meta, Hashtag-Meta, Alt-Text-Meta, Bildbeschreibungen-Meta, KI erwähnt (KI-)
(Ausnahmsweise auch mal auf Deutsch. Die englische Version ist hier.)
Bildbeschreibungen sind wichtig im Fediverse, zumindest wenn eure Posts möglicherweise auf Mastodon landen werden. Aber geht es nur um Bildbeschreibungen ganz allgemein? Geht es nur darum, überhaupt Bildbeschreibungen zu haben? Oder geht es auch um die Qualität der Bildbeschreibungen?
Blinde oder sehbehinderte Nutzer sagen, daß alles besser ist als nichts. Aber seien wir mal ehrlich, der Dateiname der Bilddatei als Alt-Text ist nutzlos. Eine Kopie des Post-Texts im Alt-Text auch; mindestens eine Handy-App für Mastodon macht das scheinbar automatisch. Irgendwelcher Kauderwelsch, der in den Alt-Text reingeschrieben wird, damit da irgendein Alt-Text steht, ist auch nutzlos.
Also schreibt ihr eine kurze Bildbeschreibung für euren Alt-Text. Das sollte viel besser sein als nichts.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung nicht detailliert genug ist.
Weil ihr eine längere Bildbeschreibung nicht schreiben könnt oder wollt, überlaßt ihr das einer KI.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung offensichtlicher KI-Slop ist. Die KI ist ungenau, sie halluziniert, sie identifizert Sachen falsch, und sie läßt immer noch Details aus.
Okay, also setzt ihr euch hin und steckt einen Haufen Zeit und Aufwand in eine handgeschriebene Bildbeschreibung, die gleichermaßen akkurat und detailliert ist. Zumindest glaubt ihr das.
Und es könnte immer noch jemand kommen und euch kritisieren und/oder sanktionieren, weil ihr bestimmte Details ausgelassen habt.
Wenn ihr eure Bildbeschreibung nicht zu deren Zufriedenheit in Ordnung bringt, dann werdet ihr als ableistisch beschimpft und blockiert mit öffentlichem Trara, damit möglichst viele andere Nutzer euch auch blockieren mögen.
Nun entwickeln sich die Mindestanforderungen für Bildbeschreibungen über die Jahre immer weiter. Was heute wichtig ist, war vor zwei Jahren nicht unbedingt wichtig. Was heute unwichtig ist, kann in zwei oder fünf Jahren durchaus auf einmal wichtig sein. Heute schon kritisieren Alt-Text-Aktivisten Bildposts, die schon etliche Jahre alt sind, aufgrund von deren Bildbeschreibungen, die sie als suboptimal ansehen. Das bedeutet, daß die Bildbeschreibungen, die ihr heute schreibt, noch so lange gut genug bleiben müssen, wie eure Bilderposts verfügbar bleiben. Falls nicht, viel Spaß dabei, durch alle eure alten Bilderposts zu gehen, sie alle zu editieren und bei allen die Bildbeschreibungen an die aktuellen Mindestanforderungen anzupassen.
Es gibt nur eine Möglichkeit, langfristig vor Mastodons Alt-Text-Polizei sicher zu sein: Als allererstes müßt ihr euch aufschlauen über die vielen Regeln und Richtlinien für Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen, und darüber gibt's dutzendweise englischsprachige Websites. Man kann unmöglich im voraus wissen, welche dieser Regeln von irgendjemandem bei der Alt-Text-Polizei irgendwann in der Zukunft für zwingend erforderlich erklärt werden, also solltet ihr sie jetzt schon bis aufs i-Tüpfelchen einhalten. Wenn zwei davon sich gegenseitig widersprechen, müßt ihr natürlich wissen, welche davon ihr einzuhalten habt.
Ihr müßt auch wissen, daß die Anforderungen und Qualitätsstandards für gute Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen auf Mastodon ganz andere sind als im ganzen Rest des Web. Was fürs Web gut genug ist, ist nicht zwingend auch gut genug für Mastodon.
Zu guter Letzt müßt ihr euer Publikum kennen. Und normalerweise kann jeder irgendwo im Fediverse oder sogar im Web euer Publikum sein. Es gibt nur ganz wenige Orte im Fediverse, wo ihr steuern könnt, wer in der Lage sein wird, euer Zeugs zu lesen, und Mastodon gehört nicht dazu. Ihr müßt euer Publikum kennen, und ihr müßt zumindest einschätzen können, was euer Publikum über den Inhalt eures Bildes weiß, was es nicht weiß und was es wissen muß. Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, was etwas ist, erklärt es, aber bitte im Post-Text und nicht im Alt-Text! Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, wie etwas aussieht, das aber vielleicht wissen will, dann beschreibt es.
Bei meinen eigenen Bildern ist meine Strategie, für jedes Bild zwei Beschreibungen zu schreiben. Die eine ist die kurze Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Alt-Text. Die werde ich in Zukunft auf maximal 512 Zeichen beschränken, weil Misskey und seine Forks Alt-Texte, die länger als 512 Zeichen sind, löschen. Die andere ist die lange Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Post-Text. Die lange Bildbeschreibung ist volldetailliert, sie enthält alle Erklärungen, die zum Verständnis des Bildes und seiner Beschreibungen nötig sind, und sie enthält Transkripte von jedem einzelnen Stück Text, das es irgendwo innerhalb der Grenzen des Bildes gibt, egal, ob auf dem Bild lesbar oder nicht.
Memes zu posten, ist ein Stück weit einfacher. Es gibt nur eine Bildbeschreibung, die hoffentlich kurz genug für den Alt-Text ist. Aber trotzdem habe ich einen ganzen Haufen Sachen zu erklären, und weil ich mich nicht immer auf Links wie nach KnowYourMeme verlassen kann, muß ich oft selbst eine ganze Menge Erklärungen in den Post schreiben.
Idealerweise ist das Schlimmste, was mir passieren kann, daß ich dafür kritisiert werde, daß mein Alt-Text die 200-Zeichen-Marke oder mein Post die 500-Zeichen-Marke überschreitet, oder daß ich für das Letztere blockiert werde. Das Risiko, daß das passiert, reduziere ich mit einer Zusammenfassung, die eine Langer-Post-Inhaltswarnung mit der ungefähren Länge des Post enthält, und den Hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong, #CWLongPost, #LangerPost und #CWLangerPost, die dann gefiltert werden können.
Aber ich hoffe, daß keiner sagen kann, ich hätte mich nicht genug angestrengt.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Zeichenlimit #Zeichenlimits #ZeichenlimitMeta #CWZeichenlimitMeta #500Zeichen #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta -
CW: Gute Bildbeschreibungen bringen einen sehr viel größeren Aufwand mit sich, als ihr vielleicht glaubt; CW: lang (über 6.000 Zeichen), Fediverse-Meta, Fediverse-über-Mastodon-hinaus-Meta, Zeichenlimit-Meta, Inhaltswarnungen-Meta/Content-Warning-Meta, Hashtag-Meta, Alt-Text-Meta, Bildbeschreibungen-Meta, KI erwähnt (KI-)
(Ausnahmsweise auch mal auf Deutsch. Die englische Version ist hier.)
Bildbeschreibungen sind wichtig im Fediverse, zumindest wenn eure Posts möglicherweise auf Mastodon landen werden. Aber geht es nur um Bildbeschreibungen ganz allgemein? Geht es nur darum, überhaupt Bildbeschreibungen zu haben? Oder geht es auch um die Qualität der Bildbeschreibungen?
Blinde oder sehbehinderte Nutzer sagen, daß alles besser ist als nichts. Aber seien wir mal ehrlich, der Dateiname der Bilddatei als Alt-Text ist nutzlos. Eine Kopie des Post-Texts im Alt-Text auch; mindestens eine Handy-App für Mastodon macht das scheinbar automatisch. Irgendwelcher Kauderwelsch, der in den Alt-Text reingeschrieben wird, damit da irgendein Alt-Text steht, ist auch nutzlos.
Also schreibt ihr eine kurze Bildbeschreibung für euren Alt-Text. Das sollte viel besser sein als nichts.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung nicht detailliert genug ist.
Weil ihr eine längere Bildbeschreibung nicht schreiben könnt oder wollt, überlaßt ihr das einer KI.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung offensichtlicher KI-Slop ist. Die KI ist ungenau, sie halluziniert, sie identifizert Sachen falsch, und sie läßt immer noch Details aus.
Okay, also setzt ihr euch hin und steckt einen Haufen Zeit und Aufwand in eine handgeschriebene Bildbeschreibung, die gleichermaßen akkurat und detailliert ist. Zumindest glaubt ihr das.
Und es könnte immer noch jemand kommen und euch kritisieren und/oder sanktionieren, weil ihr bestimmte Details ausgelassen habt.
Wenn ihr eure Bildbeschreibung nicht zu deren Zufriedenheit in Ordnung bringt, dann werdet ihr als ableistisch beschimpft und blockiert mit öffentlichem Trara, damit möglichst viele andere Nutzer euch auch blockieren mögen.
Nun entwickeln sich die Mindestanforderungen für Bildbeschreibungen über die Jahre immer weiter. Was heute wichtig ist, war vor zwei Jahren nicht unbedingt wichtig. Was heute unwichtig ist, kann in zwei oder fünf Jahren durchaus auf einmal wichtig sein. Heute schon kritisieren Alt-Text-Aktivisten Bildposts, die schon etliche Jahre alt sind, aufgrund von deren Bildbeschreibungen, die sie als suboptimal ansehen. Das bedeutet, daß die Bildbeschreibungen, die ihr heute schreibt, noch so lange gut genug bleiben müssen, wie eure Bilderposts verfügbar bleiben. Falls nicht, viel Spaß dabei, durch alle eure alten Bilderposts zu gehen, sie alle zu editieren und bei allen die Bildbeschreibungen an die aktuellen Mindestanforderungen anzupassen.
Es gibt nur eine Möglichkeit, langfristig vor Mastodons Alt-Text-Polizei sicher zu sein: Als allererstes müßt ihr euch aufschlauen über die vielen Regeln und Richtlinien für Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen, und darüber gibt's dutzendweise englischsprachige Websites. Man kann unmöglich im voraus wissen, welche dieser Regeln von irgendjemandem bei der Alt-Text-Polizei irgendwann in der Zukunft für zwingend erforderlich erklärt werden, also solltet ihr sie jetzt schon bis aufs i-Tüpfelchen einhalten. Wenn zwei davon sich gegenseitig widersprechen, müßt ihr natürlich wissen, welche davon ihr einzuhalten habt.
Ihr müßt auch wissen, daß die Anforderungen und Qualitätsstandards für gute Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen auf Mastodon ganz andere sind als im ganzen Rest des Web. Was fürs Web gut genug ist, ist nicht zwingend auch gut genug für Mastodon.
Zu guter Letzt müßt ihr euer Publikum kennen. Und normalerweise kann jeder irgendwo im Fediverse oder sogar im Web euer Publikum sein. Es gibt nur ganz wenige Orte im Fediverse, wo ihr steuern könnt, wer in der Lage sein wird, euer Zeugs zu lesen, und Mastodon gehört nicht dazu. Ihr müßt euer Publikum kennen, und ihr müßt zumindest einschätzen können, was euer Publikum über den Inhalt eures Bildes weiß, was es nicht weiß und was es wissen muß. Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, was etwas ist, erklärt es, aber bitte im Post-Text und nicht im Alt-Text! Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, wie etwas aussieht, das aber vielleicht wissen will, dann beschreibt es.
Bei meinen eigenen Bildern ist meine Strategie, für jedes Bild zwei Beschreibungen zu schreiben. Die eine ist die kurze Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Alt-Text. Die werde ich in Zukunft auf maximal 512 Zeichen beschränken, weil Misskey und seine Forks Alt-Texte, die länger als 512 Zeichen sind, löschen. Die andere ist die lange Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Post-Text. Die lange Bildbeschreibung ist volldetailliert, sie enthält alle Erklärungen, die zum Verständnis des Bildes und seiner Beschreibungen nötig sind, und sie enthält Transkripte von jedem einzelnen Stück Text, das es irgendwo innerhalb der Grenzen des Bildes gibt, egal, ob auf dem Bild lesbar oder nicht.
Memes zu posten, ist ein Stück weit einfacher. Es gibt nur eine Bildbeschreibung, die hoffentlich kurz genug für den Alt-Text ist. Aber trotzdem habe ich einen ganzen Haufen Sachen zu erklären, und weil ich mich nicht immer auf Links wie nach KnowYourMeme verlassen kann, muß ich oft selbst eine ganze Menge Erklärungen in den Post schreiben.
Idealerweise ist das Schlimmste, was mir passieren kann, daß ich dafür kritisiert werde, daß mein Alt-Text die 200-Zeichen-Marke oder mein Post die 500-Zeichen-Marke überschreitet, oder daß ich für das Letztere blockiert werde. Das Risiko, daß das passiert, reduziere ich mit einer Zusammenfassung, die eine Langer-Post-Inhaltswarnung mit der ungefähren Länge des Post enthält, und den Hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong, #CWLongPost, #LangerPost und #CWLangerPost, die dann gefiltert werden können.
Aber ich hoffe, daß keiner sagen kann, ich hätte mich nicht genug angestrengt.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Zeichenlimit #Zeichenlimits #ZeichenlimitMeta #CWZeichenlimitMeta #500Zeichen #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta -
CW: Gute Bildbeschreibungen bringen einen sehr viel größeren Aufwand mit sich, als ihr vielleicht glaubt; CW: lang (über 6.000 Zeichen), Fediverse-Meta, Fediverse-über-Mastodon-hinaus-Meta, Zeichenlimit-Meta, Inhaltswarnungen-Meta/Content-Warning-Meta, Hashtag-Meta, Alt-Text-Meta, Bildbeschreibungen-Meta, KI erwähnt (KI-)
(Ausnahmsweise auch mal auf Deutsch. Die englische Version ist hier.)
Bildbeschreibungen sind wichtig im Fediverse, zumindest wenn eure Posts möglicherweise auf Mastodon landen werden. Aber geht es nur um Bildbeschreibungen ganz allgemein? Geht es nur darum, überhaupt Bildbeschreibungen zu haben? Oder geht es auch um die Qualität der Bildbeschreibungen?
Blinde oder sehbehinderte Nutzer sagen, daß alles besser ist als nichts. Aber seien wir mal ehrlich, der Dateiname der Bilddatei als Alt-Text ist nutzlos. Eine Kopie des Post-Texts im Alt-Text auch; mindestens eine Handy-App für Mastodon macht das scheinbar automatisch. Irgendwelcher Kauderwelsch, der in den Alt-Text reingeschrieben wird, damit da irgendein Alt-Text steht, ist auch nutzlos.
Also schreibt ihr eine kurze Bildbeschreibung für euren Alt-Text. Das sollte viel besser sein als nichts.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung nicht detailliert genug ist.
Weil ihr eine längere Bildbeschreibung nicht schreiben könnt oder wollt, überlaßt ihr das einer KI.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung offensichtlicher KI-Slop ist. Die KI ist ungenau, sie halluziniert, sie identifizert Sachen falsch, und sie läßt immer noch Details aus.
Okay, also setzt ihr euch hin und steckt einen Haufen Zeit und Aufwand in eine handgeschriebene Bildbeschreibung, die gleichermaßen akkurat und detailliert ist. Zumindest glaubt ihr das.
Und es könnte immer noch jemand kommen und euch kritisieren und/oder sanktionieren, weil ihr bestimmte Details ausgelassen habt.
Wenn ihr eure Bildbeschreibung nicht zu deren Zufriedenheit in Ordnung bringt, dann werdet ihr als ableistisch beschimpft und blockiert mit öffentlichem Trara, damit möglichst viele andere Nutzer euch auch blockieren mögen.
Nun entwickeln sich die Mindestanforderungen für Bildbeschreibungen über die Jahre immer weiter. Was heute wichtig ist, war vor zwei Jahren nicht unbedingt wichtig. Was heute unwichtig ist, kann in zwei oder fünf Jahren durchaus auf einmal wichtig sein. Heute schon kritisieren Alt-Text-Aktivisten Bildposts, die schon etliche Jahre alt sind, aufgrund von deren Bildbeschreibungen, die sie als suboptimal ansehen. Das bedeutet, daß die Bildbeschreibungen, die ihr heute schreibt, noch so lange gut genug bleiben müssen, wie eure Bilderposts verfügbar bleiben. Falls nicht, viel Spaß dabei, durch alle eure alten Bilderposts zu gehen, sie alle zu editieren und bei allen die Bildbeschreibungen an die aktuellen Mindestanforderungen anzupassen.
Es gibt nur eine Möglichkeit, langfristig vor Mastodons Alt-Text-Polizei sicher zu sein: Als allererstes müßt ihr euch aufschlauen über die vielen Regeln und Richtlinien für Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen, und darüber gibt's dutzendweise englischsprachige Websites. Man kann unmöglich im voraus wissen, welche dieser Regeln von irgendjemandem bei der Alt-Text-Polizei irgendwann in der Zukunft für zwingend erforderlich erklärt werden, also solltet ihr sie jetzt schon bis aufs i-Tüpfelchen einhalten. Wenn zwei davon sich gegenseitig widersprechen, müßt ihr natürlich wissen, welche davon ihr einzuhalten habt.
Ihr müßt auch wissen, daß die Anforderungen und Qualitätsstandards für gute Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen auf Mastodon ganz andere sind als im ganzen Rest des Web. Was fürs Web gut genug ist, ist nicht zwingend auch gut genug für Mastodon.
Zu guter Letzt müßt ihr euer Publikum kennen. Und normalerweise kann jeder irgendwo im Fediverse oder sogar im Web euer Publikum sein. Es gibt nur ganz wenige Orte im Fediverse, wo ihr steuern könnt, wer in der Lage sein wird, euer Zeugs zu lesen, und Mastodon gehört nicht dazu. Ihr müßt euer Publikum kennen, und ihr müßt zumindest einschätzen können, was euer Publikum über den Inhalt eures Bildes weiß, was es nicht weiß und was es wissen muß. Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, was etwas ist, erklärt es, aber bitte im Post-Text und nicht im Alt-Text! Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, wie etwas aussieht, das aber vielleicht wissen will, dann beschreibt es.
Bei meinen eigenen Bildern ist meine Strategie, für jedes Bild zwei Beschreibungen zu schreiben. Die eine ist die kurze Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Alt-Text. Die werde ich in Zukunft auf maximal 512 Zeichen beschränken, weil Misskey und seine Forks Alt-Texte, die länger als 512 Zeichen sind, löschen. Die andere ist die lange Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Post-Text. Die lange Bildbeschreibung ist volldetailliert, sie enthält alle Erklärungen, die zum Verständnis des Bildes und seiner Beschreibungen nötig sind, und sie enthält Transkripte von jedem einzelnen Stück Text, das es irgendwo innerhalb der Grenzen des Bildes gibt, egal, ob auf dem Bild lesbar oder nicht.
Memes zu posten, ist ein Stück weit einfacher. Es gibt nur eine Bildbeschreibung, die hoffentlich kurz genug für den Alt-Text ist. Aber trotzdem habe ich einen ganzen Haufen Sachen zu erklären, und weil ich mich nicht immer auf Links wie nach KnowYourMeme verlassen kann, muß ich oft selbst eine ganze Menge Erklärungen in den Post schreiben.
Idealerweise ist das Schlimmste, was mir passieren kann, daß ich dafür kritisiert werde, daß mein Alt-Text die 200-Zeichen-Marke oder mein Post die 500-Zeichen-Marke überschreitet, oder daß ich für das Letztere blockiert werde. Das Risiko, daß das passiert, reduziere ich mit einer Zusammenfassung, die eine Langer-Post-Inhaltswarnung mit der ungefähren Länge des Post enthält, und den Hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong, #CWLongPost, #LangerPost und #CWLangerPost, die dann gefiltert werden können.
Aber ich hoffe, daß keiner sagen kann, ich hätte mich nicht genug angestrengt.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Zeichenlimit #Zeichenlimits #ZeichenlimitMeta #CWZeichenlimitMeta #500Zeichen #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta -
CW: Gute Bildbeschreibungen bringen einen sehr viel größeren Aufwand mit sich, als ihr vielleicht glaubt; CW: lang (über 6.000 Zeichen), Fediverse-Meta, Fediverse-über-Mastodon-hinaus-Meta, Zeichenlimit-Meta, Inhaltswarnungen-Meta/Content-Warning-Meta, Hashtag-Meta, Alt-Text-Meta, Bildbeschreibungen-Meta, KI erwähnt (KI-)
(Ausnahmsweise auch mal auf Deutsch. Die englische Version ist hier.)
Bildbeschreibungen sind wichtig im Fediverse, zumindest wenn eure Posts möglicherweise auf Mastodon landen werden. Aber geht es nur um Bildbeschreibungen ganz allgemein? Geht es nur darum, überhaupt Bildbeschreibungen zu haben? Oder geht es auch um die Qualität der Bildbeschreibungen?
Blinde oder sehbehinderte Nutzer sagen, daß alles besser ist als nichts. Aber seien wir mal ehrlich, der Dateiname der Bilddatei als Alt-Text ist nutzlos. Eine Kopie des Post-Texts im Alt-Text auch; mindestens eine Handy-App für Mastodon macht das scheinbar automatisch. Irgendwelcher Kauderwelsch, der in den Alt-Text reingeschrieben wird, damit da irgendein Alt-Text steht, ist auch nutzlos.
Also schreibt ihr eine kurze Bildbeschreibung für euren Alt-Text. Das sollte viel besser sein als nichts.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung nicht detailliert genug ist.
Weil ihr eine längere Bildbeschreibung nicht schreiben könnt oder wollt, überlaßt ihr das einer KI.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung offensichtlicher KI-Slop ist. Die KI ist ungenau, sie halluziniert, sie identifizert Sachen falsch, und sie läßt immer noch Details aus.
Okay, also setzt ihr euch hin und steckt einen Haufen Zeit und Aufwand in eine handgeschriebene Bildbeschreibung, die gleichermaßen akkurat und detailliert ist. Zumindest glaubt ihr das.
Und es könnte immer noch jemand kommen und euch kritisieren und/oder sanktionieren, weil ihr bestimmte Details ausgelassen habt.
Wenn ihr eure Bildbeschreibung nicht zu deren Zufriedenheit in Ordnung bringt, dann werdet ihr als ableistisch beschimpft und blockiert mit öffentlichem Trara, damit möglichst viele andere Nutzer euch auch blockieren mögen.
Nun entwickeln sich die Mindestanforderungen für Bildbeschreibungen über die Jahre immer weiter. Was heute wichtig ist, war vor zwei Jahren nicht unbedingt wichtig. Was heute unwichtig ist, kann in zwei oder fünf Jahren durchaus auf einmal wichtig sein. Heute schon kritisieren Alt-Text-Aktivisten Bildposts, die schon etliche Jahre alt sind, aufgrund von deren Bildbeschreibungen, die sie als suboptimal ansehen. Das bedeutet, daß die Bildbeschreibungen, die ihr heute schreibt, noch so lange gut genug bleiben müssen, wie eure Bilderposts verfügbar bleiben. Falls nicht, viel Spaß dabei, durch alle eure alten Bilderposts zu gehen, sie alle zu editieren und bei allen die Bildbeschreibungen an die aktuellen Mindestanforderungen anzupassen.
Es gibt nur eine Möglichkeit, langfristig vor Mastodons Alt-Text-Polizei sicher zu sein: Als allererstes müßt ihr euch aufschlauen über die vielen Regeln und Richtlinien für Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen, und darüber gibt's dutzendweise englischsprachige Websites. Man kann unmöglich im voraus wissen, welche dieser Regeln von irgendjemandem bei der Alt-Text-Polizei irgendwann in der Zukunft für zwingend erforderlich erklärt werden, also solltet ihr sie jetzt schon bis aufs i-Tüpfelchen einhalten. Wenn zwei davon sich gegenseitig widersprechen, müßt ihr natürlich wissen, welche davon ihr einzuhalten habt.
Ihr müßt auch wissen, daß die Anforderungen und Qualitätsstandards für gute Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen auf Mastodon ganz andere sind als im ganzen Rest des Web. Was fürs Web gut genug ist, ist nicht zwingend auch gut genug für Mastodon.
Zu guter Letzt müßt ihr euer Publikum kennen. Und normalerweise kann jeder irgendwo im Fediverse oder sogar im Web euer Publikum sein. Es gibt nur ganz wenige Orte im Fediverse, wo ihr steuern könnt, wer in der Lage sein wird, euer Zeugs zu lesen, und Mastodon gehört nicht dazu. Ihr müßt euer Publikum kennen, und ihr müßt zumindest einschätzen können, was euer Publikum über den Inhalt eures Bildes weiß, was es nicht weiß und was es wissen muß. Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, was etwas ist, erklärt es, aber bitte im Post-Text und nicht im Alt-Text! Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, wie etwas aussieht, das aber vielleicht wissen will, dann beschreibt es.
Bei meinen eigenen Bildern ist meine Strategie, für jedes Bild zwei Beschreibungen zu schreiben. Die eine ist die kurze Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Alt-Text. Die werde ich in Zukunft auf maximal 512 Zeichen beschränken, weil Misskey und seine Forks Alt-Texte, die länger als 512 Zeichen sind, löschen. Die andere ist die lange Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Post-Text. Die lange Bildbeschreibung ist volldetailliert, sie enthält alle Erklärungen, die zum Verständnis des Bildes und seiner Beschreibungen nötig sind, und sie enthält Transkripte von jedem einzelnen Stück Text, das es irgendwo innerhalb der Grenzen des Bildes gibt, egal, ob auf dem Bild lesbar oder nicht.
Memes zu posten, ist ein Stück weit einfacher. Es gibt nur eine Bildbeschreibung, die hoffentlich kurz genug für den Alt-Text ist. Aber trotzdem habe ich einen ganzen Haufen Sachen zu erklären, und weil ich mich nicht immer auf Links wie nach KnowYourMeme verlassen kann, muß ich oft selbst eine ganze Menge Erklärungen in den Post schreiben.
Idealerweise ist das Schlimmste, was mir passieren kann, daß ich dafür kritisiert werde, daß mein Alt-Text die 200-Zeichen-Marke oder mein Post die 500-Zeichen-Marke überschreitet, oder daß ich für das Letztere blockiert werde. Das Risiko, daß das passiert, reduziere ich mit einer Zusammenfassung, die eine Langer-Post-Inhaltswarnung mit der ungefähren Länge des Post enthält, und den Hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong, #CWLongPost, #LangerPost und #CWLangerPost, die dann gefiltert werden können.
Aber ich hoffe, daß keiner sagen kann, ich hätte mich nicht genug angestrengt.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Zeichenlimit #Zeichenlimits #ZeichenlimitMeta #CWZeichenlimitMeta #500Zeichen #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta -
CW: Gute Bildbeschreibungen bringen einen sehr viel größeren Aufwand mit sich, als ihr vielleicht glaubt; CW: lang (über 6.000 Zeichen), Fediverse-Meta, Fediverse-über-Mastodon-hinaus-Meta, Zeichenlimit-Meta, Inhaltswarnungen-Meta/Content-Warning-Meta, Hashtag-Meta, Alt-Text-Meta, Bildbeschreibungen-Meta, KI erwähnt (KI-)
(Ausnahmsweise auch mal auf Deutsch. Die englische Version ist hier.)
Bildbeschreibungen sind wichtig im Fediverse, zumindest wenn eure Posts möglicherweise auf Mastodon landen werden. Aber geht es nur um Bildbeschreibungen ganz allgemein? Geht es nur darum, überhaupt Bildbeschreibungen zu haben? Oder geht es auch um die Qualität der Bildbeschreibungen?
Blinde oder sehbehinderte Nutzer sagen, daß alles besser ist als nichts. Aber seien wir mal ehrlich, der Dateiname der Bilddatei als Alt-Text ist nutzlos. Eine Kopie des Post-Texts im Alt-Text auch; mindestens eine Handy-App für Mastodon macht das scheinbar automatisch. Irgendwelcher Kauderwelsch, der in den Alt-Text reingeschrieben wird, damit da irgendein Alt-Text steht, ist auch nutzlos.
Also schreibt ihr eine kurze Bildbeschreibung für euren Alt-Text. Das sollte viel besser sein als nichts.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung nicht detailliert genug ist.
Weil ihr eine längere Bildbeschreibung nicht schreiben könnt oder wollt, überlaßt ihr das einer KI.
Und dann werdet ihr kritisiert und sanktioniert, weil eure Bildbeschreibung offensichtlicher KI-Slop ist. Die KI ist ungenau, sie halluziniert, sie identifizert Sachen falsch, und sie läßt immer noch Details aus.
Okay, also setzt ihr euch hin und steckt einen Haufen Zeit und Aufwand in eine handgeschriebene Bildbeschreibung, die gleichermaßen akkurat und detailliert ist. Zumindest glaubt ihr das.
Und es könnte immer noch jemand kommen und euch kritisieren und/oder sanktionieren, weil ihr bestimmte Details ausgelassen habt.
Wenn ihr eure Bildbeschreibung nicht zu deren Zufriedenheit in Ordnung bringt, dann werdet ihr als ableistisch beschimpft und blockiert mit öffentlichem Trara, damit möglichst viele andere Nutzer euch auch blockieren mögen.
Nun entwickeln sich die Mindestanforderungen für Bildbeschreibungen über die Jahre immer weiter. Was heute wichtig ist, war vor zwei Jahren nicht unbedingt wichtig. Was heute unwichtig ist, kann in zwei oder fünf Jahren durchaus auf einmal wichtig sein. Heute schon kritisieren Alt-Text-Aktivisten Bildposts, die schon etliche Jahre alt sind, aufgrund von deren Bildbeschreibungen, die sie als suboptimal ansehen. Das bedeutet, daß die Bildbeschreibungen, die ihr heute schreibt, noch so lange gut genug bleiben müssen, wie eure Bilderposts verfügbar bleiben. Falls nicht, viel Spaß dabei, durch alle eure alten Bilderposts zu gehen, sie alle zu editieren und bei allen die Bildbeschreibungen an die aktuellen Mindestanforderungen anzupassen.
Es gibt nur eine Möglichkeit, langfristig vor Mastodons Alt-Text-Polizei sicher zu sein: Als allererstes müßt ihr euch aufschlauen über die vielen Regeln und Richtlinien für Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen, und darüber gibt's dutzendweise englischsprachige Websites. Man kann unmöglich im voraus wissen, welche dieser Regeln von irgendjemandem bei der Alt-Text-Polizei irgendwann in der Zukunft für zwingend erforderlich erklärt werden, also solltet ihr sie jetzt schon bis aufs i-Tüpfelchen einhalten. Wenn zwei davon sich gegenseitig widersprechen, müßt ihr natürlich wissen, welche davon ihr einzuhalten habt.
Ihr müßt auch wissen, daß die Anforderungen und Qualitätsstandards für gute Alt-Texte und Bildbeschreibungen auf Mastodon ganz andere sind als im ganzen Rest des Web. Was fürs Web gut genug ist, ist nicht zwingend auch gut genug für Mastodon.
Zu guter Letzt müßt ihr euer Publikum kennen. Und normalerweise kann jeder irgendwo im Fediverse oder sogar im Web euer Publikum sein. Es gibt nur ganz wenige Orte im Fediverse, wo ihr steuern könnt, wer in der Lage sein wird, euer Zeugs zu lesen, und Mastodon gehört nicht dazu. Ihr müßt euer Publikum kennen, und ihr müßt zumindest einschätzen können, was euer Publikum über den Inhalt eures Bildes weiß, was es nicht weiß und was es wissen muß. Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, was etwas ist, erklärt es, aber bitte im Post-Text und nicht im Alt-Text! Wenn euer Publikum nicht zwingend weiß, wie etwas aussieht, das aber vielleicht wissen will, dann beschreibt es.
Bei meinen eigenen Bildern ist meine Strategie, für jedes Bild zwei Beschreibungen zu schreiben. Die eine ist die kurze Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Alt-Text. Die werde ich in Zukunft auf maximal 512 Zeichen beschränken, weil Misskey und seine Forks Alt-Texte, die länger als 512 Zeichen sind, löschen. Die andere ist die lange Bildbeschreibung; die kommt in den Post-Text. Die lange Bildbeschreibung ist volldetailliert, sie enthält alle Erklärungen, die zum Verständnis des Bildes und seiner Beschreibungen nötig sind, und sie enthält Transkripte von jedem einzelnen Stück Text, das es irgendwo innerhalb der Grenzen des Bildes gibt, egal, ob auf dem Bild lesbar oder nicht.
Memes zu posten, ist ein Stück weit einfacher. Es gibt nur eine Bildbeschreibung, die hoffentlich kurz genug für den Alt-Text ist. Aber trotzdem habe ich einen ganzen Haufen Sachen zu erklären, und weil ich mich nicht immer auf Links wie nach KnowYourMeme verlassen kann, muß ich oft selbst eine ganze Menge Erklärungen in den Post schreiben.
Idealerweise ist das Schlimmste, was mir passieren kann, daß ich dafür kritisiert werde, daß mein Alt-Text die 200-Zeichen-Marke oder mein Post die 500-Zeichen-Marke überschreitet, oder daß ich für das Letztere blockiert werde. Das Risiko, daß das passiert, reduziere ich mit einer Zusammenfassung, die eine Langer-Post-Inhaltswarnung mit der ungefähren Länge des Post enthält, und den Hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong, #CWLongPost, #LangerPost und #CWLangerPost, die dann gefiltert werden können.
Aber ich hoffe, daß keiner sagen kann, ich hätte mich nicht genug angestrengt.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Zeichenlimit #Zeichenlimits #ZeichenlimitMeta #CWZeichenlimitMeta #500Zeichen #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #Bildbeschreibung #Bildbeschreibungen #BildbeschreibungenMeta #CWBildbeschreibungenMeta -
CW: Good image descriptions require a much bigger effort than you may think; CW: long (over 5,300 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, character limit meta, content warning meta, hashtag meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, AI mentioned (AI-)
Image descriptions are important in the Fediverse, at least if your posts have a chance to reach Mastodon. But is it only about having image descriptions in general? Is it only about having image descriptions at all? Or is it about image description quality as well?
Blind or visually-impaired users say that anything is better than nothing. But seriously, the image file name as the alt-text is useless. So is a copy of the post text as the alt-text; at least one mobile app for Mastodon seems to do that automatically. So is some gibberish written into the alt-text, just so that there's some alt-text.
So you write a short image description for your alt-text. That should be much better than nothing.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description lacks detail.
Since you can't or don't want to write a longer description, you leave that to an AI.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description is obvious AI slop. The AI is inaccurate, it hallucinates, it misidentifies things and it still leaves out details.
Okay, so you sit down and put quite some time and effort into a hand-written image description that's both accurate and detailed. At least you think so.
And still, someone may come and criticise and/or sanction you for having left out certain details.
If you don't fix your image description to their satisfaction, you're insulted as ableist and blocked very publicly so that as many other users as possible block you, too.
Now, minimum quality standards for image descriptions are evolving over time. What matters now didn't necessarily matter two years ago. Things that don't matter now may matter in two years or in five years. Even today, alt-text activists criticise image posts that are several years old for image descriptions that they consider less than optimal. This means the image descriptions that you write today must be good enough for as long as your image posts stay available. If they aren't, have fun going through all your old image posts, editing them and upgrading the image descriptions to the latest minimum requirements.
There's only way to be safe from Mastodon's alt-text police in the long run: First of all, you must educate yourself about all the rules and guidelines of alt-texts and image descriptions, and there are dozens of websites about these. You can't know beforehand which ones of these rules will be declared mandatory by someone from the alt-text police in the future, so you'd better follow them to a tee already now. Of course, when two rules contradict each other, you must know which one to follow.
Also, you must know that the requirements and quality standards for good alt-texts and image descriptions on Mastodon are different from the entire rest of the Web. What's good enough for the Web isn't necessarily good enough for Mastodon.
Lastly, you must know your audience. And normally, your audience can be anyone anywhere in the Fediverse or even on the Web. There are only very few places in the Fediverse where you can control who will be able to read your stuff, and Mastodon isn't one of them. You must know your audience, and you must at least be able to estimate what they know about the contents of your image, what they don't know and what they need to know. If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something is, explain it, but please do so in the post text and not in the alt-text! If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something looks like, but it may want to know, describe what it looks like.
As for my own images, my strategy is to write two image descriptions for each image. One is the short image description; it goes into the alt-text. I'm going to limit that to a maximum of 512 characters because Misskey and its forks delete alt-texts that are over 512 characters long. The other one is the long image description; it goes into the post text. The long image description is fully detailed, it contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its descriptions, and it contains transcripts of every last bit of text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable in the image or not.
Posting memes is a bit easier. There is only one image description that's hopefully short enough to go into the alt-text. But I still need to explain a whole lot of things, and as I can't always rely upon links to websites like KnowYourMeme for explanations, I often have to write a whole lot of explanations into the post.
Ideally, the worst that could happen to me is being criticised for my alt-text exceeding 200 characters or my post exceeding 500 characters or being blocked for the latter. I reduce the chance for that to happen with a summary that includes a long post content warning with the rough length of the post and the hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong and #CWLongPost that can be filtered. I almost always add hashtags for folks to filter.
But I hope that nobody can say I haven't tried hard enough.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta -
CW: Good image descriptions require a much bigger effort than you may think; CW: long (over 5,300 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, character limit meta, content warning meta, hashtag meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, AI mentioned (AI-)
Image descriptions are important in the Fediverse, at least if your posts have a chance to reach Mastodon. But is it only about having image descriptions in general? Is it only about having image descriptions at all? Or is it about image description quality as well?
Blind or visually-impaired users say that anything is better than nothing. But seriously, the image file name as the alt-text is useless. So is a copy of the post text as the alt-text; at least one mobile app for Mastodon seems to do that automatically. So is some gibberish written into the alt-text, just so that there's some alt-text.
So you write a short image description for your alt-text. That should be much better than nothing.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description lacks detail.
Since you can't or don't want to write a longer description, you leave that to an AI.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description is obvious AI slop. The AI is inaccurate, it hallucinates, it misidentifies things and it still leaves out details.
Okay, so you sit down and put quite some time and effort into a hand-written image description that's both accurate and detailed. At least you think so.
And still, someone may come and criticise and/or sanction you for having left out certain details.
If you don't fix your image description to their satisfaction, you're insulted as ableist and blocked very publicly so that as many other users as possible block you, too.
Now, minimum quality standards for image descriptions are evolving over time. What matters now didn't necessarily matter two years ago. Things that don't matter now may matter in two years or in five years. Even today, alt-text activists criticise image posts that are several years old for image descriptions that they consider less than optimal. This means the image descriptions that you write today must be good enough for as long as your image posts stay available. If they aren't, have fun going through all your old image posts, editing them and upgrading the image descriptions to the latest minimum requirements.
There's only way to be safe from Mastodon's alt-text police in the long run: First of all, you must educate yourself about all the rules and guidelines of alt-texts and image descriptions, and there are dozens of websites about these. You can't know beforehand which ones of these rules will be declared mandatory by someone from the alt-text police in the future, so you'd better follow them to a tee already now. Of course, when two rules contradict each other, you must know which one to follow.
Also, you must know that the requirements and quality standards for good alt-texts and image descriptions on Mastodon are different from the entire rest of the Web. What's good enough for the Web isn't necessarily good enough for Mastodon.
Lastly, you must know your audience. And normally, your audience can be anyone anywhere in the Fediverse or even on the Web. There are only very few places in the Fediverse where you can control who will be able to read your stuff, and Mastodon isn't one of them. You must know your audience, and you must at least be able to estimate what they know about the contents of your image, what they don't know and what they need to know. If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something is, explain it, but please do so in the post text and not in the alt-text! If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something looks like, but it may want to know, describe what it looks like.
As for my own images, my strategy is to write two image descriptions for each image. One is the short image description; it goes into the alt-text. I'm going to limit that to a maximum of 512 characters because Misskey and its forks delete alt-texts that are over 512 characters long. The other one is the long image description; it goes into the post text. The long image description is fully detailed, it contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its descriptions, and it contains transcripts of every last bit of text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable in the image or not.
Posting memes is a bit easier. There is only one image description that's hopefully short enough to go into the alt-text. But I still need to explain a whole lot of things, and as I can't always rely upon links to websites like KnowYourMeme for explanations, I often have to write a whole lot of explanations into the post.
Ideally, the worst that could happen to me is being criticised for my alt-text exceeding 200 characters or my post exceeding 500 characters or being blocked for the latter. I reduce the chance for that to happen with a summary that includes a long post content warning with the rough length of the post and the hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong and #CWLongPost that can be filtered. I almost always add hashtags for folks to filter.
But I hope that nobody can say I haven't tried hard enough.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta -
CW: Good image descriptions require a much bigger effort than you may think; CW: long (over 5,300 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, character limit meta, content warning meta, hashtag meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, AI mentioned (AI-)
Image descriptions are important in the Fediverse, at least if your posts have a chance to reach Mastodon. But is it only about having image descriptions in general? Is it only about having image descriptions at all? Or is it about image description quality as well?
Blind or visually-impaired users say that anything is better than nothing. But seriously, the image file name as the alt-text is useless. So is a copy of the post text as the alt-text; at least one mobile app for Mastodon seems to do that automatically. So is some gibberish written into the alt-text, just so that there's some alt-text.
So you write a short image description for your alt-text. That should be much better than nothing.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description lacks detail.
Since you can't or don't want to write a longer description, you leave that to an AI.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description is obvious AI slop. The AI is inaccurate, it hallucinates, it misidentifies things and it still leaves out details.
Okay, so you sit down and put quite some time and effort into a hand-written image description that's both accurate and detailed. At least you think so.
And still, someone may come and criticise and/or sanction you for having left out certain details.
If you don't fix your image description to their satisfaction, you're insulted as ableist and blocked very publicly so that as many other users as possible block you, too.
Now, minimum quality standards for image descriptions are evolving over time. What matters now didn't necessarily matter two years ago. Things that don't matter now may matter in two years or in five years. Even today, alt-text activists criticise image posts that are several years old for image descriptions that they consider less than optimal. This means the image descriptions that you write today must be good enough for as long as your image posts stay available. If they aren't, have fun going through all your old image posts, editing them and upgrading the image descriptions to the latest minimum requirements.
There's only way to be safe from Mastodon's alt-text police in the long run: First of all, you must educate yourself about all the rules and guidelines of alt-texts and image descriptions, and there are dozens of websites about these. You can't know beforehand which ones of these rules will be declared mandatory by someone from the alt-text police in the future, so you'd better follow them to a tee already now. Of course, when two rules contradict each other, you must know which one to follow.
Also, you must know that the requirements and quality standards for good alt-texts and image descriptions on Mastodon are different from the entire rest of the Web. What's good enough for the Web isn't necessarily good enough for Mastodon.
Lastly, you must know your audience. And normally, your audience can be anyone anywhere in the Fediverse or even on the Web. There are only very few places in the Fediverse where you can control who will be able to read your stuff, and Mastodon isn't one of them. You must know your audience, and you must at least be able to estimate what they know about the contents of your image, what they don't know and what they need to know. If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something is, explain it, but please do so in the post text and not in the alt-text! If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something looks like, but it may want to know, describe what it looks like.
As for my own images, my strategy is to write two image descriptions for each image. One is the short image description; it goes into the alt-text. I'm going to limit that to a maximum of 512 characters because Misskey and its forks delete alt-texts that are over 512 characters long. The other one is the long image description; it goes into the post text. The long image description is fully detailed, it contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its descriptions, and it contains transcripts of every last bit of text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable in the image or not.
Posting memes is a bit easier. There is only one image description that's hopefully short enough to go into the alt-text. But I still need to explain a whole lot of things, and as I can't always rely upon links to websites like KnowYourMeme for explanations, I often have to write a whole lot of explanations into the post.
Ideally, the worst that could happen to me is being criticised for my alt-text exceeding 200 characters or my post exceeding 500 characters or being blocked for the latter. I reduce the chance for that to happen with a summary that includes a long post content warning with the rough length of the post and the hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong and #CWLongPost that can be filtered. I almost always add hashtags for folks to filter.
But I hope that nobody can say I haven't tried hard enough.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta -
CW: Good image descriptions require a much bigger effort than you may think; CW: long (over 5,300 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, character limit meta, content warning meta, hashtag meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, AI mentioned (AI-)
Image descriptions are important in the Fediverse, at least if your posts have a chance to reach Mastodon. But is it only about having image descriptions in general? Is it only about having image descriptions at all? Or is it about image description quality as well?
Blind or visually-impaired users say that anything is better than nothing. But seriously, the image file name as the alt-text is useless. So is a copy of the post text as the alt-text; at least one mobile app for Mastodon seems to do that automatically. So is some gibberish written into the alt-text, just so that there's some alt-text.
So you write a short image description for your alt-text. That should be much better than nothing.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description lacks detail.
Since you can't or don't want to write a longer description, you leave that to an AI.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description is obvious AI slop. The AI is inaccurate, it hallucinates, it misidentifies things and it still leaves out details.
Okay, so you sit down and put quite some time and effort into a hand-written image description that's both accurate and detailed. At least you think so.
And still, someone may come and criticise and/or sanction you for having left out certain details.
If you don't fix your image description to their satisfaction, you're insulted as ableist and blocked very publicly so that as many other users as possible block you, too.
Now, minimum quality standards for image descriptions are evolving over time. What matters now didn't necessarily matter two years ago. Things that don't matter now may matter in two years or in five years. Even today, alt-text activists criticise image posts that are several years old for image descriptions that they consider less than optimal. This means the image descriptions that you write today must be good enough for as long as your image posts stay available. If they aren't, have fun going through all your old image posts, editing them and upgrading the image descriptions to the latest minimum requirements.
There's only way to be safe from Mastodon's alt-text police in the long run: First of all, you must educate yourself about all the rules and guidelines of alt-texts and image descriptions, and there are dozens of websites about these. You can't know beforehand which ones of these rules will be declared mandatory by someone from the alt-text police in the future, so you'd better follow them to a tee already now. Of course, when two rules contradict each other, you must know which one to follow.
Also, you must know that the requirements and quality standards for good alt-texts and image descriptions on Mastodon are different from the entire rest of the Web. What's good enough for the Web isn't necessarily good enough for Mastodon.
Lastly, you must know your audience. And normally, your audience can be anyone anywhere in the Fediverse or even on the Web. There are only very few places in the Fediverse where you can control who will be able to read your stuff, and Mastodon isn't one of them. You must know your audience, and you must at least be able to estimate what they know about the contents of your image, what they don't know and what they need to know. If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something is, explain it, but please do so in the post text and not in the alt-text! If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something looks like, but it may want to know, describe what it looks like.
As for my own images, my strategy is to write two image descriptions for each image. One is the short image description; it goes into the alt-text. I'm going to limit that to a maximum of 512 characters because Misskey and its forks delete alt-texts that are over 512 characters long. The other one is the long image description; it goes into the post text. The long image description is fully detailed, it contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its descriptions, and it contains transcripts of every last bit of text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable in the image or not.
Posting memes is a bit easier. There is only one image description that's hopefully short enough to go into the alt-text. But I still need to explain a whole lot of things, and as I can't always rely upon links to websites like KnowYourMeme for explanations, I often have to write a whole lot of explanations into the post.
Ideally, the worst that could happen to me is being criticised for my alt-text exceeding 200 characters or my post exceeding 500 characters or being blocked for the latter. I reduce the chance for that to happen with a summary that includes a long post content warning with the rough length of the post and the hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong and #CWLongPost that can be filtered. I almost always add hashtags for folks to filter.
But I hope that nobody can say I haven't tried hard enough.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta -
CW: Good image descriptions require a much bigger effort than you may think; CW: long (over 5,300 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, character limit meta, content warning meta, hashtag meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, AI mentioned (AI-)
Image descriptions are important in the Fediverse, at least if your posts have a chance to reach Mastodon. But is it only about having image descriptions in general? Is it only about having image descriptions at all? Or is it about image description quality as well?
Blind or visually-impaired users say that anything is better than nothing. But seriously, the image file name as the alt-text is useless. So is a copy of the post text as the alt-text; at least one mobile app for Mastodon seems to do that automatically. So is some gibberish written into the alt-text, just so that there's some alt-text.
So you write a short image description for your alt-text. That should be much better than nothing.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description lacks detail.
Since you can't or don't want to write a longer description, you leave that to an AI.
But then you're criticised and sanctioned because your image description is obvious AI slop. The AI is inaccurate, it hallucinates, it misidentifies things and it still leaves out details.
Okay, so you sit down and put quite some time and effort into a hand-written image description that's both accurate and detailed. At least you think so.
And still, someone may come and criticise and/or sanction you for having left out certain details.
If you don't fix your image description to their satisfaction, you're insulted as ableist and blocked very publicly so that as many other users as possible block you, too.
Now, minimum quality standards for image descriptions are evolving over time. What matters now didn't necessarily matter two years ago. Things that don't matter now may matter in two years or in five years. Even today, alt-text activists criticise image posts that are several years old for image descriptions that they consider less than optimal. This means the image descriptions that you write today must be good enough for as long as your image posts stay available. If they aren't, have fun going through all your old image posts, editing them and upgrading the image descriptions to the latest minimum requirements.
There's only way to be safe from Mastodon's alt-text police in the long run: First of all, you must educate yourself about all the rules and guidelines of alt-texts and image descriptions, and there are dozens of websites about these. You can't know beforehand which ones of these rules will be declared mandatory by someone from the alt-text police in the future, so you'd better follow them to a tee already now. Of course, when two rules contradict each other, you must know which one to follow.
Also, you must know that the requirements and quality standards for good alt-texts and image descriptions on Mastodon are different from the entire rest of the Web. What's good enough for the Web isn't necessarily good enough for Mastodon.
Lastly, you must know your audience. And normally, your audience can be anyone anywhere in the Fediverse or even on the Web. There are only very few places in the Fediverse where you can control who will be able to read your stuff, and Mastodon isn't one of them. You must know your audience, and you must at least be able to estimate what they know about the contents of your image, what they don't know and what they need to know. If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something is, explain it, but please do so in the post text and not in the alt-text! If your audience doesn't necessarily know what something looks like, but it may want to know, describe what it looks like.
As for my own images, my strategy is to write two image descriptions for each image. One is the short image description; it goes into the alt-text. I'm going to limit that to a maximum of 512 characters because Misskey and its forks delete alt-texts that are over 512 characters long. The other one is the long image description; it goes into the post text. The long image description is fully detailed, it contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its descriptions, and it contains transcripts of every last bit of text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable in the image or not.
Posting memes is a bit easier. There is only one image description that's hopefully short enough to go into the alt-text. But I still need to explain a whole lot of things, and as I can't always rely upon links to websites like KnowYourMeme for explanations, I often have to write a whole lot of explanations into the post.
Ideally, the worst that could happen to me is being criticised for my alt-text exceeding 200 characters or my post exceeding 500 characters or being blocked for the latter. I reduce the chance for that to happen with a summary that includes a long post content warning with the rough length of the post and the hashtags #Long, #LongPost, #CWLong and #CWLongPost that can be filtered. I almost always add hashtags for folks to filter.
But I hope that nobody can say I haven't tried hard enough.
#FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta -
@Stefan Bohacek @Blorbo Admin Chicken Yes, I wish more servers had this rule and enforced it.
Officially appointed moderators only go by the server's written rules, and they only enforce them against local users.
The HOA, on the other hand, have some rules in their heads. Everyone has different rules. And they enforce them against everyone, even regardless of where everyone actually is. Like, they attack Friendica users for allegedly misusing the CW field because they neither know that these users are not on Mastodon, much less where they actually are, nor that Mastodon's CW field has been an abstract field on Friendica for seven years longer than it has been a CW field on Mastodon.
This is part of what makes the Fediverse a minefield once your messages start reaching Mastodon.
I can't say that I'll stop being so overly careful with everything and putting such a big effort particulary into image descriptions, summaries/content warnings and hashtags for filter-triggering purposes if more or even most Mastodon servers adopt and enforce this rule. The irony is that this rule actually protects my long hashtag lines.
In fact, rules like these also ought to include that nobody must be policed for writing "too long" posts because there are places in the Fediverse that neither have character limits to worry about nor a character-limiting culture.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta -
@Stefan Bohacek @Blorbo Admin Chicken Yes, I wish more servers had this rule and enforced it.
Officially appointed moderators only go by the server's written rules, and they only enforce them against local users.
The HOA, on the other hand, have some rules in their heads. Everyone has different rules. And they enforce them against everyone, even regardless of where everyone actually is. Like, they attack Friendica users for allegedly misusing the CW field because they neither know that these users are not on Mastodon, much less where they actually are, nor that Mastodon's CW field has been an abstract field on Friendica for seven years longer than it has been a CW field on Mastodon.
This is part of what makes the Fediverse a minefield once your messages start reaching Mastodon.
I can't say that I'll stop being so overly careful with everything and putting such a big effort particulary into image descriptions, summaries/content warnings and hashtags for filter-triggering purposes if more or even most Mastodon servers adopt and enforce this rule. The irony is that this rule actually protects my long hashtag lines.
In fact, rules like these also ought to include that nobody must be policed for writing "too long" posts because there are places in the Fediverse that neither have character limits to worry about nor a character-limiting culture.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta -
@Stefan Bohacek @Blorbo Admin Chicken Yes, I wish more servers had this rule and enforced it.
Officially appointed moderators only go by the server's written rules, and they only enforce them against local users.
The HOA, on the other hand, have some rules in their heads. Everyone has different rules. And they enforce them against everyone, even regardless of where everyone actually is. Like, they attack Friendica users for allegedly misusing the CW field because they neither know that these users are not on Mastodon, much less where they actually are, nor that Mastodon's CW field has been an abstract field on Friendica for seven years longer than it has been a CW field on Mastodon.
This is part of what makes the Fediverse a minefield once your messages start reaching Mastodon.
I can't say that I'll stop being so overly careful with everything and putting such a big effort particulary into image descriptions, summaries/content warnings and hashtags for filter-triggering purposes if more or even most Mastodon servers adopt and enforce this rule. The irony is that this rule actually protects my long hashtag lines.
In fact, rules like these also ought to include that nobody must be policed for writing "too long" posts because there are places in the Fediverse that neither have character limits to worry about nor a character-limiting culture.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta -
@Stefan Bohacek @Blorbo Admin Chicken Yes, I wish more servers had this rule and enforced it.
Officially appointed moderators only go by the server's written rules, and they only enforce them against local users.
The HOA, on the other hand, have some rules in their heads. Everyone has different rules. And they enforce them against everyone, even regardless of where everyone actually is. Like, they attack Friendica users for allegedly misusing the CW field because they neither know that these users are not on Mastodon, much less where they actually are, nor that Mastodon's CW field has been an abstract field on Friendica for seven years longer than it has been a CW field on Mastodon.
This is part of what makes the Fediverse a minefield once your messages start reaching Mastodon.
I can't say that I'll stop being so overly careful with everything and putting such a big effort particulary into image descriptions, summaries/content warnings and hashtags for filter-triggering purposes if more or even most Mastodon servers adopt and enforce this rule. The irony is that this rule actually protects my long hashtag lines.
In fact, rules like these also ought to include that nobody must be policed for writing "too long" posts because there are places in the Fediverse that neither have character limits to worry about nor a character-limiting culture.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta -
@Stefan Bohacek @Blorbo Admin Chicken Yes, I wish more servers had this rule and enforced it.
Officially appointed moderators only go by the server's written rules, and they only enforce them against local users.
The HOA, on the other hand, have some rules in their heads. Everyone has different rules. And they enforce them against everyone, even regardless of where everyone actually is. Like, they attack Friendica users for allegedly misusing the CW field because they neither know that these users are not on Mastodon, much less where they actually are, nor that Mastodon's CW field has been an abstract field on Friendica for seven years longer than it has been a CW field on Mastodon.
This is part of what makes the Fediverse a minefield once your messages start reaching Mastodon.
I can't say that I'll stop being so overly careful with everything and putting such a big effort particulary into image descriptions, summaries/content warnings and hashtags for filter-triggering purposes if more or even most Mastodon servers adopt and enforce this rule. The irony is that this rule actually protects my long hashtag lines.
In fact, rules like these also ought to include that nobody must be policed for writing "too long" posts because there are places in the Fediverse that neither have character limits to worry about nor a character-limiting culture.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta -
@Hazelnoot My goal is to get alt-texts and image descriptions right. As right as possible.
My goal is to not be sanctioned and/or lectured by the alt-text police for allegedly being lazy and/or careless.
In order to achieve that, I must be ahead of everyone's requirements. Whatever these requirements may be.
But in order to achieve that, I must know their requirements. Everyone's requirements.
If you want me to follow your rules, I need to know your rules.
Right now, I'm probably vastly overcompliant with everyone's rules with only a few exceptions that I can't comply with (alt-texts must not be longer than 200 or 125 or 100 characters, posts in the Fediverse must not be longer than 500 characters, all of the text in an image must always be transcribed in the alt-text etc.).
This way, I hope that my image posts will stay in compliance with existing image description quality standards for a few years, and when they no longer are, they're so old that nobody demands I upgrade my image descriptions to then-current standards.
tl;dr: "Just do it" doesn't cut it. Just doing it is likely to get you sanctioned because you don't do it well enough. And something is no longer better than nothing.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #MastodonCulture -
@[18+!!] saph I'm not an artist, but I really need to know the definition of "helpful" in the context of "helpful alt-text". What are the requirements for alt-text to count as "helpful"?
It must be 100% accurate, I guess that's a given. This also means that it must be 100% written by hand as opposed to AI-generated.
But what are the minimum requirements in terms of details for an alt-text to be helpful?
Can alt-text be too long/too detailed to be helpful?
I'm going to limit my alt-texts to a maximum of 512 characters. Misskey, Sharkey, Iceshrimp-JS and the other Misskey forks automatically delete any alt-text that's longer than 512 characters, making it appear like I hadn't provided any alt-text to begin with, that's why. Newspaper scans aside, can alt-text with no more than 512 characters be too lacking in detail to be helpful?
What if, in addition to an alt-text with a maximum of 512 characters, I also provide a much longer and much more detailed image description in the post text? (My character limit is not 500, but over 16.7 million. I can post long descriptions with tens of thousands of characters in one piece, and I have done so in the past.)
Would that be acceptable to provide the details in description that do not fit into an alt-text of no more than 512 characters?
Or is that unacceptable because the description in the alt-text must be as detailed as required, and additional descriptions in the post don't count?
Or is that unacceptable because there must only be one description to each image, namely in the alt-text and only in the alt-text?
Or is that unacceptable because it makes my post longer than 500 characters?
Are explanations and other additional information about the image allowed in the post text? Because they are not allowed in the alt-text because some people cannot access alt-text.
Or must explanations etc. absolutely be in the alt-text in order for the alt-text to be "helpful" enough?
Must they even be only in the alt-text so that the post never exceeds 500 characters?
What if I can't describe and explain my images in a maximum of 512 characters? What if I can't describe and explain my images in a maximum of 1,500 characters either, but I absolutely must describe and explain them in the alt-text?
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters -
@hosh The alt-text police of the Mastodon Home Owners' Association (Mastodon HOA) have a tendency to be overzealous. And they don't talk to each other. They all act for themselves as lone wolves with exactly no coordination amongst each other whatsoever. You never know what kinds of rules they whip up for themselves.
Chances are that they only let image descriptions count that come directly with the image. If they acknowledge an image description outside the alt-text, it must be in the post itself. Not as an external link, but the description text itself.
Besides, at least some in the Mastodon HOA have problems with external links. And I don't just mean that they don't trust embedded links whose URL they can't see in plain sight, the kind that Hubzilla can create and Mastodon can't (not that Hubzilla couldn't fake a plain-sight link by embedding a different URL than the visible).
I don't mean either that probably a majority of Mastodon users don't even recognise embedded links without a visible URL as such because they don't know that such a thing can exist in the Fediverse, because Mastodon can't make them.
No, what I mean is the notion that external links for explanations are inherently bad from an accessibility point of view. "Mastodon" (as in how Mastodon users experience the Fediverse, i.e. the Mastodon Web UI or any of the popular mobile phone apps) is sufficiently accessible. But the Web outside of "Mastodon" (same definition again) may not be accessible enough.
A few years ago, I've literally read a Mastodon toot in which someone said that explanations must not be linked to. Linked websites have a risk of not being accessible. Explanations must always be directly in the same post. Apparently, they thought that everything and anything can be explained and broken down until everyone understands it within 500 characters.
This is also why Mastodon users tend to explain their images in the alt-text. It's only there where they have at least halfway enough characters for an explanation, 1,500 per image as opposed to usually only 500 in the post text. (On Mastodon, much unlike Hubzilla, the alt-text is a separate database field that exists separately for each of the up to four images per message.)
That is, explanations must never go into the alt-text because there are people who cannot open alt-texts to read them. But nobody on Mastodon knows that.
It should be obvious that what counts for explanations counts for visual descriptions just as well.
And in fact, regarding Hubzilla articles, they're actually right. I've once pointed an actually blind screen reader user to an article on my Hubzilla channel. She said she couldn't even navigate the Web interface. She literally couldn't get to the text body of the article to have it read out by her screen reader.
Hubzilla's Web interface, no matter which app is opened, is not accessible. It does not work with screen readers. It's largely still stuck in 2012 when nobdy made any ruckus about the accessibility of hobbyist Web projects.
The only reason why at least some blind or visually-impaired users can read our Hubzilla posts and comments and DMs is because they're all on Mastodon, and they read our content either on Mastodon's Web UI or a Mastodon app that supports screen readers. But they do not read our content at the source. Because they can't.
I actually took into consideration linking to my long image descriptions. But my idea was not to link to a Hubzilla article, nor to a Hubzilla wiki or a Hubzilla card. No, my idea was to write a plain HTML document, upload it to my file space and link to that.
I've dropped that idea for various reasons:- Generally, still, external links are frowned upon.
- I don't know if plain HTML is accessible without a CSS. And I can't add a CSS to this HTML if the HTML document is not served to the recipient by a Web server, but by a file server.
- I don't know how Google Chrome on Android or Safari on an iPhone will react when they access an HTML document on a file space. Will they display it as a website? Or will they download it onto the device as a file without opening it because, again, it is served to them not by a Web server, but by a file server?
- Mobile users dislike opening websites from apps because they dislike their browser popping open. And on Mastodon, much unlike Hubzilla, almost everyone is on a phone and a dedicated app almost all the time.
- This also means that mobile users would have the image and the description in two separate apps. The image in their Mastodon app, the description in their browser.
- I would need much more description.
Right now, when I have multiple images, my long descriptions consist of a preamble that contains all necessary explanations and, if applicable, visual descriptions of elements that are common to all images. The individual descriptions for each image follow.
But if I had one image description file per image, then each image description would need the whole preamble included. I can't just add the preamble to the first description file.
What if someone opens the third description file first? They'll only have a very incomplete description. And linking to the first description file is inconvenient. I would have to know the URL of the first file before completing and uploading the other files because I'd have to include the URL of the first file in them. And the users would have to have three documents open (the image post, the description of the image they're interested in, the description of the first image with the preamble) just to experience one image. Spread across two phone apps.
And that's why I can't put my additional long description in an external document.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #MastodonCulture -
CW: Long posts vs insufficiently described images: I can't win either way; CW: long (over 3,500 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, content warning meta, character limit meta
On the one hand, I have to go out of my way and write two image descriptions for each one of my original images. One is short and goes into the alt-text, and I'm going to limit all my future alt-text to a maximum of 512 characters (otherwise users on Misskey, Sharkey etc. will believe I haven't written any alt-text because they won't receive any due to a bug).
The other one is enormous degrees of magnitudes longer than anything most Fediverse users have ever read in the Fediverse. It also contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its description, and if there's text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable or not, it contains verbatim transcripts of said text.
The nature of my original images requires such long descriptions. Besides, the only way to really be safe from the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA is to overcomply with whatever minimum standards for good image descriptions anyone of them may have.
On the other hand, the self-same Mastodon HOA is likely to sanction me for the self-same posts. The reason: The posts are way too long. They exceed the limit of 500 characters that's so deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture that many Mastodonians are eager to defend it. Even if I hide them behind a summary with a content warning about the post being long. If I were to appease these Mastodonians, I'd have to underdescribe my images, and I wouldn't be able to explain them at all.
Speaking of underdescribing, I think at least some members of the alt-text police actually don't let image descriptions in the post count. What counts is only the image description in the alt-text. It must be accurate, it must be sufficiently detailed, and it must contain all the text transcripts. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they demanded sufficient explanations in the alt-text, not knowing that explanations in alt-text are actually a big no-no.
Even if all requirements of a good alt-text by alt-text police standards are met or even exceeded by the image description in the post, chances are the alt-text police will still sanction me if the alt-text doesn't meet these criteria.
When it comes to my original images, even squeezing all that into the 1,500-character limit for alt-texts imposed by Mastodon is pretty much impossible. Squeezing it into the 512-character limit for alt-text imposed by Misskey and its forks is even more impossible.
The only winning move is to not play at all. Curiously, some people are even upset about me rarely posting any images. Although they don't follow me. Although the channel that I use for original images (@Jupiter Rowland's (streams) outlet) has next to no reach, so even if I were to post images again, practically nobody would notice. Although it doesn't even seem that there's much interest in that kind of images in the first place.
But apparently, according to some, posting images with only rudimentary alt-text whipped up in a minute, no long description and no explanations is always so much better than not posting images because it takes so much time and effort to describe them.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CWContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #MastodonCulture -
CW: Long posts vs insufficiently described images: I can't win either way; CW: long (over 3,500 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, content warning meta, character limit meta
On the one hand, I have to go out of my way and write two image descriptions for each one of my original images. One is short and goes into the alt-text, and I'm going to limit all my future alt-text to a maximum of 512 characters (otherwise users on Misskey, Sharkey etc. will believe I haven't written any alt-text because they won't receive any due to a bug).
The other one is enormous degrees of magnitudes longer than anything most Fediverse users have ever read in the Fediverse. It also contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its description, and if there's text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable or not, it contains verbatim transcripts of said text.
The nature of my original images requires such long descriptions. Besides, the only way to really be safe from the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA is to overcomply with whatever minimum standards for good image descriptions anyone of them may have.
On the other hand, the self-same Mastodon HOA is likely to sanction me for the self-same posts. The reason: The posts are way too long. They exceed the limit of 500 characters that's so deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture that many Mastodonians are eager to defend it. Even if I hide them behind a summary with a content warning about the post being long. If I were to appease these Mastodonians, I'd have to underdescribe my images, and I wouldn't be able to explain them at all.
Speaking of underdescribing, I think at least some members of the alt-text police actually don't let image descriptions in the post count. What counts is only the image description in the alt-text. It must be accurate, it must be sufficiently detailed, and it must contain all the text transcripts. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they demanded sufficient explanations in the alt-text, not knowing that explanations in alt-text are actually a big no-no.
Even if all requirements of a good alt-text by alt-text police standards are met or even exceeded by the image description in the post, chances are the alt-text police will still sanction me if the alt-text doesn't meet these criteria.
When it comes to my original images, even squeezing all that into the 1,500-character limit for alt-texts imposed by Mastodon is pretty much impossible. Squeezing it into the 512-character limit for alt-text imposed by Misskey and its forks is even more impossible.
The only winning move is to not play at all. Curiously, some people are even upset about me rarely posting any images. Although they don't follow me. Although the channel that I use for original images (@Jupiter Rowland's (streams) outlet) has next to no reach, so even if I were to post images again, practically nobody would notice. Although it doesn't even seem that there's much interest in that kind of images in the first place.
But apparently, according to some, posting images with only rudimentary alt-text whipped up in a minute, no long description and no explanations is always so much better than not posting images because it takes so much time and effort to describe them.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CWContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #MastodonCulture -
CW: Long posts vs insufficiently described images: I can't win either way; CW: long (over 3,500 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, content warning meta, character limit meta
On the one hand, I have to go out of my way and write two image descriptions for each one of my original images. One is short and goes into the alt-text, and I'm going to limit all my future alt-text to a maximum of 512 characters (otherwise users on Misskey, Sharkey etc. will believe I haven't written any alt-text because they won't receive any due to a bug).
The other one is enormous degrees of magnitudes longer than anything most Fediverse users have ever read in the Fediverse. It also contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its description, and if there's text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable or not, it contains verbatim transcripts of said text.
The nature of my original images requires such long descriptions. Besides, the only way to really be safe from the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA is to overcomply with whatever minimum standards for good image descriptions anyone of them may have.
On the other hand, the self-same Mastodon HOA is likely to sanction me for the self-same posts. The reason: The posts are way too long. They exceed the limit of 500 characters that's so deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture that many Mastodonians are eager to defend it. Even if I hide them behind a summary with a content warning about the post being long. If I were to appease these Mastodonians, I'd have to underdescribe my images, and I wouldn't be able to explain them at all.
Speaking of underdescribing, I think at least some members of the alt-text police actually don't let image descriptions in the post count. What counts is only the image description in the alt-text. It must be accurate, it must be sufficiently detailed, and it must contain all the text transcripts. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they demanded sufficient explanations in the alt-text, not knowing that explanations in alt-text are actually a big no-no.
Even if all requirements of a good alt-text by alt-text police standards are met or even exceeded by the image description in the post, chances are the alt-text police will still sanction me if the alt-text doesn't meet these criteria.
When it comes to my original images, even squeezing all that into the 1,500-character limit for alt-texts imposed by Mastodon is pretty much impossible. Squeezing it into the 512-character limit for alt-text imposed by Misskey and its forks is even more impossible.
The only winning move is to not play at all. Curiously, some people are even upset about me rarely posting any images. Although they don't follow me. Although the channel that I use for original images (@Jupiter Rowland's (streams) outlet) has next to no reach, so even if I were to post images again, practically nobody would notice. Although it doesn't even seem that there's much interest in that kind of images in the first place.
But apparently, according to some, posting images with only rudimentary alt-text whipped up in a minute, no long description and no explanations is always so much better than not posting images because it takes so much time and effort to describe them.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CWContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #MastodonCulture -
CW: Long posts vs insufficiently described images: I can't win either way; CW: long (over 3,500 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, content warning meta, character limit meta
On the one hand, I have to go out of my way and write two image descriptions for each one of my original images. One is short and goes into the alt-text, and I'm going to limit all my future alt-text to a maximum of 512 characters (otherwise users on Misskey, Sharkey etc. will believe I haven't written any alt-text because they won't receive any due to a bug).
The other one is enormous degrees of magnitudes longer than anything most Fediverse users have ever read in the Fediverse. It also contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its description, and if there's text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable or not, it contains verbatim transcripts of said text.
The nature of my original images requires such long descriptions. Besides, the only way to really be safe from the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA is to overcomply with whatever minimum standards for good image descriptions anyone of them may have.
On the other hand, the self-same Mastodon HOA is likely to sanction me for the self-same posts. The reason: The posts are way too long. They exceed the limit of 500 characters that's so deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture that many Mastodonians are eager to defend it. Even if I hide them behind a summary with a content warning about the post being long. If I were to appease these Mastodonians, I'd have to underdescribe my images, and I wouldn't be able to explain them at all.
Speaking of underdescribing, I think at least some members of the alt-text police actually don't let image descriptions in the post count. What counts is only the image description in the alt-text. It must be accurate, it must be sufficiently detailed, and it must contain all the text transcripts. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they demanded sufficient explanations in the alt-text, not knowing that explanations in alt-text are actually a big no-no.
Even if all requirements of a good alt-text by alt-text police standards are met or even exceeded by the image description in the post, chances are the alt-text police will still sanction me if the alt-text doesn't meet these criteria.
When it comes to my original images, even squeezing all that into the 1,500-character limit for alt-texts imposed by Mastodon is pretty much impossible. Squeezing it into the 512-character limit for alt-text imposed by Misskey and its forks is even more impossible.
The only winning move is to not play at all. Curiously, some people are even upset about me rarely posting any images. Although they don't follow me. Although the channel that I use for original images (@Jupiter Rowland's (streams) outlet) has next to no reach, so even if I were to post images again, practically nobody would notice. Although it doesn't even seem that there's much interest in that kind of images in the first place.
But apparently, according to some, posting images with only rudimentary alt-text whipped up in a minute, no long description and no explanations is always so much better than not posting images because it takes so much time and effort to describe them.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CWContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #MastodonCulture -
CW: Long posts vs insufficiently described images: I can't win either way; CW: long (over 3,500 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, content warning meta, character limit meta
On the one hand, I have to go out of my way and write two image descriptions for each one of my original images. One is short and goes into the alt-text, and I'm going to limit all my future alt-text to a maximum of 512 characters (otherwise users on Misskey, Sharkey etc. will believe I haven't written any alt-text because they won't receive any due to a bug).
The other one is enormous degrees of magnitudes longer than anything most Fediverse users have ever read in the Fediverse. It also contains all explanations necessary to understand the image and its description, and if there's text anywhere within the borders of the image, readable or not, it contains verbatim transcripts of said text.
The nature of my original images requires such long descriptions. Besides, the only way to really be safe from the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA is to overcomply with whatever minimum standards for good image descriptions anyone of them may have.
On the other hand, the self-same Mastodon HOA is likely to sanction me for the self-same posts. The reason: The posts are way too long. They exceed the limit of 500 characters that's so deeply engrained into Mastodon's culture that many Mastodonians are eager to defend it. Even if I hide them behind a summary with a content warning about the post being long. If I were to appease these Mastodonians, I'd have to underdescribe my images, and I wouldn't be able to explain them at all.
Speaking of underdescribing, I think at least some members of the alt-text police actually don't let image descriptions in the post count. What counts is only the image description in the alt-text. It must be accurate, it must be sufficiently detailed, and it must contain all the text transcripts. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they demanded sufficient explanations in the alt-text, not knowing that explanations in alt-text are actually a big no-no.
Even if all requirements of a good alt-text by alt-text police standards are met or even exceeded by the image description in the post, chances are the alt-text police will still sanction me if the alt-text doesn't meet these criteria.
When it comes to my original images, even squeezing all that into the 1,500-character limit for alt-texts imposed by Mastodon is pretty much impossible. Squeezing it into the 512-character limit for alt-text imposed by Misskey and its forks is even more impossible.
The only winning move is to not play at all. Curiously, some people are even upset about me rarely posting any images. Although they don't follow me. Although the channel that I use for original images (@Jupiter Rowland's (streams) outlet) has next to no reach, so even if I were to post images again, practically nobody would notice. Although it doesn't even seem that there's much interest in that kind of images in the first place.
But apparently, according to some, posting images with only rudimentary alt-text whipped up in a minute, no long description and no explanations is always so much better than not posting images because it takes so much time and effort to describe them.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CWContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #MastodonCulture -
@C. I have two major issues with the Mastodon HOA.
One, they try hard to force "Mastodon standards", Mastodon culture and Mastodon's unwritten rules upon the whole Fediverse. Including places that not only aren't Mastodon, but that are very much not Mastodon. Simply because they can't see where a message is from. In fact, many of them are still fully convinced that the Fediverse is only Mastodon.
And so you have members of the Mastodon HOA yelling at someone who is allegedly "doing Mastodon wrong", but that someone is actually on Friendica and has been since as early as 2011. As in about five years longer than Mastodon has even existed. And seriously, the only places in the Fediverse that are even more different and farther away from Mastodon than Friendica (without specialising in something that Mastodon absolutely can't do) are Friendica's own descendants: Hubzilla, (streams), Forte.
The Mastodon HOA probably don't know that Friendica exists. They definitely don't know that either of the other three exists. They definitely don't know that any of the four is significantly different from Mastodon in any way. And frankly, they don't care a bit. If it appears on any Mastodon timeline, it's Mastodon to them, and it has to adapt to Mastodon's culture and follow Mastodon's rules.
Two, they don't coordinate anything among each other. They're just a bunch of lone wolves. Everyone has got their own standards, but everyone thinks their personal standards are the one and only Mastodon/Fediverse gold standards, and everyone enforces their own standards. And, of course, everyone thinks their standards can and must apply always, including in the most obscure edge-cases.
For example, they've got standards for describing real-life photos on Mastodon with a character limit of 500. And they try to enforce these standards always and everywhere. However, these standards don't necessarily work perfectly when I post a rendering from a super-obscure 3-D virtual world on (streams) with a character limit of over 24 million where I've got loads of room to write an additional long image description and put it into the post text.
The Mastodon HOA, or at least some of their members, appear to be constantly raising their minimum quality requirements for image descriptions. They must be absolutely accurate, and they must be sufficiently detailed that nobody will ever have to ask for a detail description. Oh, and they must explain whatever the audience may not know about the image or the description. (At this point, it's fair to mention that explanations must never go into the alt-text.)
Sure, I can do that. I have done so in the past. But I can't do that within Mastodon's alt-text character limit of 1,500 (Mastodon truncates longer alt-texts from outside). I can do that even less within Misskey's alt-text character limit of only 512 (Misskey and the Forkeys should truncate longer alt-texts, but due to a bug, they delete them entirely instead, giving the impression that you haven't written an alt-text at all). I can only do that in the additional long description in the post text.
If the Mastodon HOA demand I transcribe literally any and all text within the borders of an image, I can do that, too. In fact, I have done so in the past. I can transcribe bits of text verbatim which the Mastodon HOA can't even read. Which the Mastodon HOA couldn't even find in the image because they're so tiny. But there's no way that I can squeeze 20+ individual text transcripts into 1,500 characters of alt-text along with the rest of the visual description, much less into only 512 characters. The text transcripts will have to go into the long description in the post text, whether the Mastodon HOA want or not.
This means that the post will exceed the holy limit of 500 characters by huge magnitudes. This, in turn, means that when I've satisfied one Mastodon HOA member, another one comes and sanctions me for exceeding the holy 500-character limit. That is, chances are it's actually the same Mastodon HOA member.
In other words, if the content of an image is obscure enough and requires enough description, the only winning move when I want to post such an image is to not post it at all.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonCulture #MastodonHOA -
@Pino Carafa Well, my problem is not the alt-text.
I used to limit my alt-texts to 1,500 characters because Mastodon and its forks truncate longer alt-texts at the 1,500-character mark. In the future, I will limit them to 512 characters because Misskey and its forks should truncate them at that mark if they're longer, but instead, they delete them.
But in addition to my alt-texts, I describe my original images once more (= twice altogether). The other description is what I call the "long description", and it goes directly into the post text (as opposed to the alt-text). I don't have a character limit to worry about (over 16.7 million), so I can do what's outright unimaginable from a Mastodon point of view.
It's this long description that's causing trouble.
That is, I wouldn't wonder if the Mastodon HOA were to sanction me for my alt-text not being detailed enough when I limit it to 512 characters. In fact, I wouldn't wonder if they were to sanction me because a 1,500-character alt-text of mine is lacking important elements (descriptions of certain details, transcripts of all text within the borders of the image etc.).
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonHOA -
@Pino Carafa An additional advantage of this would be that I could first ask just how detailed a description they need. Like, if they really want me to spend two full days, morning to evening, to write something that'll take their screen reader three hours to read out loud.
The problem, however, is that the virtual worlds that I frequent change a lot. Everything is built by users. A place that I've shown in an image may change mere days or hours after I've been there, so when I go back to take a closer look for a detailed description, it doesn't look like on the image anymore.
Or that place may be gone entirely. For example, I could post some images from an in-world event, from places specifically built for this event. Then, two months later, someone asks for a more detailed description. But I can't write a more detailed description because I can't go back to these places, simply because these places were closed and shut down a few days after I had posted the images.
Lastly, my impression of Mastodon is still that a significant number of users do not want to ask. Whatever information they may need, they expect it all to come with the post immediately. Having to ask for a detail description or for an explanation appears to be about as bad style as having to ask for a description in the first place.
I've literally seen Mastodon toots in which people say that if they don't understand a post or an image in a post, they want an explanation to come with the post.
I've also seen a Mastodon toot in which someone said that it isn't sufficient to just say what's in an image, but you also have to describe what it looks like. Right away. And in my case, this is actually absolutely justified.
It's a catch-22: If I don't describe my images sufficiently, I risk being sanctioned by the Mastodon HOA for not describing my images sufficiently. But if I do, I risk being sanctioned by the Mastodon HOA for exceeding 500 characters in one post.
Oh, and if I chop my image descriptions into tiny chunks of no more than 500 characters, it's disturbing for my own ilk, the users of Friendica, Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte, who are used to not having any character limits and everything being in one message, no matter how long it is. Besides, how many Mastodon users are willing to read a thread of 120 or more posts and find that more convenient than one post with 60,000 characters?
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonHOA -
@Mastodon Migration
Basically telling other people how they should be using Mastodon is not cool unless they are violating some instance rule.
As, by the way, is telling Fediverse users who are not on Mastodon to use whatever they use instead like Mastodon users are expected to use Mastodon.Please don't be a Mastodon HOA enforcer.
Especially since the alt-text police of the Mastodon HOA have much higher alt-text and image description minimum standards than blind or visually-impaired people. And they seem to be raising their standards further and further.
I always try my best to be way ahead of anyone's image description minimum standards, also in order to demonstrate to the Mastodon HOA that I'm not a lazy bum, and that I do try hard to describe my images properly. For my own original images, this means that I have to describe each one of them twice, with a fairly short description in the alt-text and a much longer one in the post itself.
This, however, clashes with the Mastodon HOA, too, because they also enforce Mastodon's default 500-character limit Fediverse-wide by generously blocking everyone whom they catch exceeding it at first strike.
CC: @🅰🅻🅸🅲🅴 (🌈🦄)
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #500Characters #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AltTextPolice #MastodonHOA -
@Author-ized L.J. That's the problem: Whatever I do, I'll lose either way.
On the one hand, I feel a great pressure to describe and explain everything in advance. That way, nobody would ever have to ask me to describe a detail or explain something. And nobody, not even the most die-hard Mastodon alt-text activists, could say that I'm careless and that I only do the very bare minimum or not even that. There are people out there who are eager to block everyone who doesn't describe their images enough or lecture them or attack them for being lazy.
The last time I've described an image for Hubzilla, I refused to write detailed descriptions for the images within that image. That would have escalated and cost me weeks to describe them all because I'd also have had to describe dozens of images within these images and even more images within these images. Mind you, someone who travels to the place I've described couldn't actually see what I'd have described because the images in my image themselves have a limited resolution. But I genuinely felt bad for not describing these images.
Besides, if I only described my original images once, namely in the alt-text, and then briefly and concisely, and if someone came and asked me to describe certain elements at greater detail, I couldn't always do that. Sometimes I couldn't go back to the place shown in the image and take a closer look and write a more detailed description because that place simply doesn't exist anymore, or it has been modified, and it doesn't look like the image anymore. The details that I'd have to take a closer look at are gone.
On the other hand, my experience is also that posting more than 500 characters at once reduces my reach on Mastodon tremendously. I think I must have over 700 or 800 followers, but my reach on Mastodon is similar to that of someone with not even a dozen followers. And I don't think that's because what I post is so uninteresting or because of my rather controversial thoughts about the Fediverse, accessibility in the Fediverse, image descriptions etc.
Basically, I can't possibly post images without risking being sanctioned by anyone.
I've briefly considered putting my long descriptions into separate HTML documents and linking to them. In theory, that would reduce the length of my image posts greatly. However, this is entirely untested. I don't know if it'd work at all, i.e. open the HTML document in someone's browser rather than downloading it to their device as a file. I don't know either if a plain HTML document with no style sheet would be accessible to screen reader users.
What I do know, though, is that Mastodon hates external links with a flaming passion. That's also because the vast majority of Mastodon users is always on phones, using dedicated Mastodon apps. They hate their browser popping open when they tap a link all the same. Also, they tend to distrust external links because the linked documents or pages may not be sufficiently accessible.
Everything would be a whole lot easier if there were Fediverse-wide standards for image descriptions that take the requirements of blind or visually-impaired people into consideration as well as Mastodon's unique culture. If these standards were known to everyone both on Mastodon and in the non-Mastodon Fediverse. If everyone from blind or visually-impaired users to neurodivergent users to fully sighted alt-text activists agreed upon these standards all the same. And if these standards covered extreme edge-cases like mine as well. If there was a generally agreed-upon consensus on a whole lot of questions like:- Is it okay to have to ask for detailed descriptions of certain details in an image that don't matter within the context of the post?
Or do they have to be described right away if there's a chance that someone might be curious about them? What if nothing specific in the image matters more within the context than everything else? - Is it okay to have to ask for explanations if you don't understand the topic of an image?
Or do images about very obscure niche topics have to come with enough explanations for everyone to understand them right away (not counting technical or jargon terms which always have to be either avoided or explained)? - So there's the rule that all text within an image must be transcribed verbatim. How far does this rule go?
Let's suppose I have a few dozen individual bits of text within an image. Most or all of them are so small that they're unreadable. Some are so tiny that they're actually invisible at the image's resolution. Still, technically speaking, they're there. And: I can read them. Instead of reading them in the image, I can read them at the source. So I can transcribe them all.
What is the rule then?
Do I have to transcribe them although they're unreadable because the rule says all text has to be transcribed?
Do I have to transcribe them although they're unreadable because not doing so and writing that they're unreadable with no transcript is or may be considered lazy?
Do I have to transcribe them because they're unreadable, and even fully sighted people need a transcript to know what's written there?
Mustn't I transcribe them because they don't show themselves as text in the image at the image's resolution (if they actually don't)?
Mustn't I transcribe them because I must only describe what's visible in the image at the image's resolution to the naked eye?
Do I have to transcribe them in my special edge-case in spite of the two above lines because this might be my last and only chance to transcribe them, for they may be gone tomorrow, and I would no longer be able to transcribe them if someone asked for a transcript? Or must I remember to keep personal transcripts of all the texts I come across in my images, just in case someone asks for a transcript of a bit of text that no longer exists? - Must all text transcripts always be in the alt-text as opposed to an extra long image description in the post? Even if I have 20+ individual text transcripts to squeeze into Mastodon's limit of 1,500 characters of Misskey's limit of 512 characters?
Or is it okay to- transcribe them in a separate long description in the post text
- not put these transcripts into the alt-text
- mention in the alt-text that there is a long image description in the post, that all the texts in the image are transcribed there, and how exactly to find that long image description?
- If any of the above requires a separate long image description because the image description won't fit within the alt-text character limits, is it preferred for the long description to be in a linked document that will open in the browser (given one has the means to write and host such a document, and users on Hubzilla, (streams) and Forte do have these means)?
Or must the long description be where the image is at all costs? Must it be in the post itself for the convenience of app users even if it inflates the post to a hyper-massive length to the inconvenience of Mastodon users?
Worse yet: I've recently found out that none of the things above must be discussed on Mastodon. Ever. You must not discuss that stuff. You must do it. But you must do it right off the bat. For whichever individual definition of "right".
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #Transcript #Transcripts #A11y #Accessibility - Is it okay to have to ask for detailed descriptions of certain details in an image that don't matter within the context of the post?
-
Your own posts aren't any better anyway; CW: long (over 1,300 characters), Fediverse meta, Fediverse-beyond-Mastodon meta, alt-text meta, image description meta, character limit meta, hashtag meta View article View summary
@David Mitchell :CApride: On the other hand, when I look at your personal timeline, it's obvious that you've never really arrived on Mastodon. You break all kinds of rules. You break alt-text and image-describing rules, and you break Mastodon's cultural rules.
You write alt-texts in multiple paragraphs. You almost never use CWs, not for posts over 500 characters, not for US or Canadian politics, not for wars, never. You rarely use hashtags, and when you do, you sometimes put them in-line instead of all into the bottom line. In-line hashtags are inconvenient for screen reader users.
You boost image posts without checking whether the images have alt-texts, much less whether the alt-texts are accurate, sufficiently detailed and in line with the existing alt-text and image description rules. You boost posts about potentially disturbing topics that have no CWs.
So don't come lecturing me if your own doings are likely to get you silently muted and blocked by other Mastodon users left and right.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #Hashtag #Hashtags #HashtagMeta #CWHashtagMeta #MastodonCulture