#cwfedimeta — Public Fediverse posts

@Ruby Skunkloon

For both alt text and CWs, I wish there was a more automated way to handle this. Like, having canned CW tags at the ready, or an image detection bot that actually works as intended for filling out alt text. (That's before getting into the weeds of "AI", which is contentious in itself.)

For CWs, in theory, things could be a whole lot better. A whole lot better than what Mastodon's culture demands.

Instead of the writer supplying a CW and forcing the self-same CW upon all readers all the same, CWs could be automatically generated on the readers' side. Like, those who need that particular CW get it, and those who don't need it don't get it.

This is technically possible. Mastodon has introduced it with version 4.0 in October, 2022. It's a filter setting. In general, this has been available in the Fediverse since 2010 when Friendica introduced it first. On Friendica and all its descendants, CW culture has always been built around this rather than writing CWs into the summary field and forcing them upon everyone all the same.

This has got a few downsides, though:

• Writers still have to remember to take care of adding filter-triggering keywords.
• The best way to add keywords without shoehorning them into the text is as hashtags, but many Mastodon users have a problem with more than, say, four hashtags per message.
• Whereas Friendica and its descendants simply have a keyword list for this purpose, Mastodon requires one new filter to be set up for each keyword.
• I guess there are lots of Mastodon apps that don't have creating or editing filters built in. And I know there are lots of Mastodon users who would never ever touch Mastodon's Web UI under any circumstances.
• Mastodon users are used to being coddled and pampered all over. Most of them would never take care of CWs being generated on their side by themselves. They expect CWs to be served to them by the writers.
• And then there are those Fediverse server applications that either don't have a hiding/CW-generating filter or no filters at all.

Fully automated, zero-click, fire-and-forget image description generators have been desired by Mastodon users for about as long as alt-texts have been a thing. But let me tell you: Fully automated, fire-and-forget image description generators that can describe any image perfectly accurately are utopic. Even more if they're also expected to adhere to all existing image-describing and alt-text rules and adapt the descriptions both to the context and to the audience that's to be expected.

Trust me. My original images could barely be more obscure and niche. They're renderings from extremely obscure 3-D virtual worlds. And I've actually had two of them described by an AI after writing my own highly detailed image descriptions 100% by hand with no AI assistance. It took me several hours to write one description and two days to write the other one.

The results were abysmal. The AI descriptions were no match for my hand-written descriptions at all. They omitted things that really stood out in the images, they got things wrong, they guessed things that I knew for a fact.

Granted, it was extra unfair because the AI only had the image to look at whereas I wrote the image descriptions by looking at the real deal in-world with an almost infinitely higher resolution, with the ability to look around obstacles even. Still, at least for my own images, I consider this style of writing image descriptions the benchmark. AI will never get there. It will never have the extreme niche knowledge of an expert, and it will never be able to see things that I see.

CC: @Princess Nettles Succubish

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Mastodon #MastodonCulture #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AI #LLM #LLMs #AIVsHuman #HumanVsAI

@Ruby Skunkloon

For both alt text and CWs, I wish there was a more automated way to handle this. Like, having canned CW tags at the ready, or an image detection bot that actually works as intended for filling out alt text. (That's before getting into the weeds of "AI", which is contentious in itself.)

For CWs, in theory, things could be a whole lot better. A whole lot better than what Mastodon's culture demands.

Instead of the writer supplying a CW and forcing the self-same CW upon all readers all the same, CWs could be automatically generated on the readers' side. Like, those who need that particular CW get it, and those who don't need it don't get it.

This is technically possible. Mastodon has introduced it with version 4.0 in October, 2022. It's a filter setting. In general, this has been available in the Fediverse since 2010 when Friendica introduced it first. On Friendica and all its descendants, CW culture has always been built around this rather than writing CWs into the summary field and forcing them upon everyone all the same.

This has got a few downsides, though:

• Writers still have to remember to take care of adding filter-triggering keywords.
• The best way to add keywords without shoehorning them into the text is as hashtags, but many Mastodon users have a problem with more than, say, four hashtags per message.
• Whereas Friendica and its descendants simply have a keyword list for this purpose, Mastodon requires one new filter to be set up for each keyword.
• I guess there are lots of Mastodon apps that don't have creating or editing filters built in. And I know there are lots of Mastodon users who would never ever touch Mastodon's Web UI under any circumstances.
• Mastodon users are used to being coddled and pampered all over. Most of them would never take care of CWs being generated on their side by themselves. They expect CWs to be served to them by the writers.
• And then there are those Fediverse server applications that either don't have a hiding/CW-generating filter or no filters at all.

Fully automated, zero-click, fire-and-forget image description generators have been desired by Mastodon users for about as long as alt-texts have been a thing. But let me tell you: Fully automated, fire-and-forget image description generators that can describe any image perfectly accurately are utopic. Even more if they're also expected to adhere to all existing image-describing and alt-text rules and adapt the descriptions both to the context and to the audience that's to be expected.

Trust me. My original images could barely be more obscure and niche. They're renderings from extremely obscure 3-D virtual worlds. And I've actually had two of them described by an AI after writing my own highly detailed image descriptions 100% by hand with no AI assistance. It took me several hours to write one description and two days to write the other one.

The results were abysmal. The AI descriptions were no match for my hand-written descriptions at all. They omitted things that really stood out in the images, they got things wrong, they guessed things that I knew for a fact.

Granted, it was extra unfair because the AI only had the image to look at whereas I wrote the image descriptions by looking at the real deal in-world with an almost infinitely higher resolution, with the ability to look around obstacles even. Still, at least for my own images, I consider this style of writing image descriptions the benchmark. AI will never get there. It will never have the extreme niche knowledge of an expert, and it will never be able to see things that I see.

CC: @Princess Nettles Succubish

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Mastodon #MastodonCulture #CW #CWs #CWMeta #ContentWarning #ContentWarnings #ContentWarningMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #AI #LLM #LLMs #AIVsHuman #HumanVsAI

@Alex R @✨pencilears✨(KD7POW) @Princess Nettles Succubish There's so much that next to nobody on Mastodon knows about alt-texts.

For example, how inconvenient long alt-texts are for screen reader users. Or what a screen reader is in the first place.

Or that there are people who cannot access alt-texts, and therefore writing around character limits by putting explanations and other information exclusively into the alt-text counters accessibility. (In fact, that there are also other disabilities and disorders present in the Fediverse than visual impairments.)

Or that Misskey and its various forks and forks of forks (Sharkey, Iceshrimp-JS, Catodon, CherryPick etc.) have an alt-text character limit of only 512. That they're supposed to truncate longer alt-texts at this mark. And that, due to a bug that still hasn't been fixed, they silently delete such alt-texts instead, giving the impression that there hasn't been an alt-text to begin with. (Or that Misskey and its various forks and forks of forks exist in the first place.)

The attitude is rather that any and all information that someone may need about an image must immediately come with the post. In the alt-text, of course. Explanations included. Because, you know, having to ask for explanations or having to ask for a description of a detail is almost as bad as having to ask for an image description in the first place. Such appears to be Mastodon's alt-text culture.

Those affected the most are people like me. People who only ever post images about super-obscure niche topics. In my case, that's renderings from extremely obscure 3-D virtual worlds, memes about these virtual worlds and memes about the Fediverse (not limited to memes about Mastodon). They all require extensive explanations, and the former require extensive visual descriptions, at least judging by what Mastodon's culture seems to demand. I mean, how is anyone supposed to know what anything looks like in my images?

At least I don't really have any character limits for message texts to worry about, so my long descriptions and explanations can go into the message text of only one single post. Still, I think we have proof now that the alt-text police demands a sufficiently descriptive alt-text even when the image is extensively described in the message text.

I guess nobody on Mastodon has ever really had a problem with me filling Mastodon's alt-text character limit up to the very last character. They'd rather mute or block me for exceeding 500 characters in the message text.

At least all this rarely happens. Describing and explaining images while trying to adhere to all the rules and guidelines out there, Mastodon's culture included, has become so tedious and time-consuming that I haven't posted a single non-meme image in over two years now.

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Misskey #Forkey #Forkeys #Sharkey #Iceshrimp #IceshrimpJS #Catodon #CherryPick #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #ScreenReader #ScreenReaders #MastodonCulture

@Alex R @✨pencilears✨(KD7POW) @Princess Nettles Succubish There's so much that next to nobody on Mastodon knows about alt-texts.

For example, how inconvenient long alt-texts are for screen reader users. Or what a screen reader is in the first place.

Or that there are people who cannot access alt-texts, and therefore writing around character limits by putting explanations and other information exclusively into the alt-text counters accessibility. (In fact, that there are also other disabilities and disorders present in the Fediverse than visual impairments.)

Or that Misskey and its various forks and forks of forks (Sharkey, Iceshrimp-JS, Catodon, CherryPick etc.) have an alt-text character limit of only 512. That they're supposed to truncate longer alt-texts at this mark. And that, due to a bug that still hasn't been fixed, they silently delete such alt-texts instead, giving the impression that there hasn't been an alt-text to begin with. (Or that Misskey and its various forks and forks of forks exist in the first place.)

The attitude is rather that any and all information that someone may need about an image must immediately come with the post. In the alt-text, of course. Explanations included. Because, you know, having to ask for explanations or having to ask for a description of a detail is almost as bad as having to ask for an image description in the first place. Such appears to be Mastodon's alt-text culture.

Those affected the most are people like me. People who only ever post images about super-obscure niche topics. In my case, that's renderings from extremely obscure 3-D virtual worlds, memes about these virtual worlds and memes about the Fediverse (not limited to memes about Mastodon). They all require extensive explanations, and the former require extensive visual descriptions, at least judging by what Mastodon's culture seems to demand. I mean, how is anyone supposed to know what anything looks like in my images?

At least I don't really have any character limits for message texts to worry about, so my long descriptions and explanations can go into the message text of only one single post. Still, I think we have proof now that the alt-text police demands a sufficiently descriptive alt-text even when the image is extensively described in the message text.

I guess nobody on Mastodon has ever really had a problem with me filling Mastodon's alt-text character limit up to the very last character. They'd rather mute or block me for exceeding 500 characters in the message text.

At least all this rarely happens. Describing and explaining images while trying to adhere to all the rules and guidelines out there, Mastodon's culture included, has become so tedious and time-consuming that I haven't posted a single non-meme image in over two years now.

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #Misskey #Forkey #Forkeys #Sharkey #Iceshrimp #IceshrimpJS #Catodon #CherryPick #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #ScreenReader #ScreenReaders #MastodonCulture

@✨pencilears✨(KD7POW)

I think a lot of people have unrealistically high expectations for alt text, and as a consequence they add a bunch of fluff, which makes writing alt-text feel daunting if that's the standard.

Looking at this phenomenon from outside of Mastodon (I'm on Hubzilla), I've got the impression that this has become engrained into Mastodon's very culture.

Mastodon has a limit of 1,500 characters so that the text in images with a lot of text can be transcribed in alt-text. However, many Mastodon users, knowing everything they know about online accessibility, take this as an invitation to write very detailed visual descriptions. Other Mastodon users cheer and applaud for these long descriptions.

Maybe it's just my impression. Maybe I'm wrong. But I kind of expect at least some Mastodon users to start both demanding and enforcing very long and detailed alt-texts/image descriptions, regardless of long alt-texts actually being bad for various reasons and even Mastodon users saying so.

I mean, I've already read several times that images must also be explained if their topic or their content is uncommon. In the alt-text, of course. Even though explanations in the alt-text are not accessible to people with certain disabilities. But most Mastodon users can't imagine that at least some Fediverse users can pour thousands or even millions of characters into the message text.

Nonetheless, this gives the impression of Mastodon's culture demanding any and all extra information that people may need about an image be immediately delivered on a silver platter, along with the image.

Granted, if what the image shows is obscure enough, and especially if it also might make people curious enough, this appears to be justified. The former definitely does apply to my own original images, and chances are the latter applies, too. Technically speaking, my original images need a whole lot of explanation because nobody has ever even heard of what they show, and they also need highly detailed descriptions because nobody who can't see the image has even only the faintest idea of what anything in the image looks like.

So what I do is describe each one of my original images twice. One description is the long description; it's fully detailed, it contains transcripts of all bits of text within the borders of the image, and it contains all necessary explanations. It goes into the message text, and it's pretty much always a five-digit number of characters long.

The other description is shorter, and it goes into the alt-text in order to satisfy those alt-text hardliners who demand there be an actually descriptive alt-text even if there's an extremely detailed image description in the message text. I used to fill Mastodon's limit of 1,500 characters up almost or actually entirely. My future alt-texts might be limited to a bit over 500 characters because Misskey and its many forks delete alt-texts that are longer than 512 characters. (Then again, they also discard anything with a message text of over 10,000 characters, I think.)

Describing one image takes me from several hours up to two full days. I rarely receive any praise for this effort. But I guess the downside is that each original image that I post has the channel on which I post my original images now (as rarely as this happens) silently muted or blocked by a whole number of Mastodon users for exceeding the holy 500-character limit.

I try to play it safe. I try to always be ahead of Mastodon's alt-text police, far enough for them not to demand I edit the image descriptions of a three-year-old image post because they're sub-standard. So in addition to these monster descriptions, I have over 30 rules and guidelines for describing images and writing alt-texts that I adhere to as strictly as I possibly can. And yes, I also expect most of them to be enforced by the alt-text police sooner or later.

CC: @Princess Nettles Succubish

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonCulture

@✨pencilears✨(KD7POW)

I think a lot of people have unrealistically high expectations for alt text, and as a consequence they add a bunch of fluff, which makes writing alt-text feel daunting if that's the standard.

Looking at this phenomenon from outside of Mastodon (I'm on Hubzilla), I've got the impression that this has become engrained into Mastodon's very culture.

Mastodon has a limit of 1,500 characters so that the text in images with a lot of text can be transcribed in alt-text. However, many Mastodon users, knowing everything they know about online accessibility, take this as an invitation to write very detailed visual descriptions. Other Mastodon users cheer and applaud for these long descriptions.

Maybe it's just my impression. Maybe I'm wrong. But I kind of expect at least some Mastodon users to start both demanding and enforcing very long and detailed alt-texts/image descriptions, regardless of long alt-texts actually being bad for various reasons and even Mastodon users saying so.

I mean, I've already read several times that images must also be explained if their topic or their content is uncommon. In the alt-text, of course. Even though explanations in the alt-text are not accessible to people with certain disabilities. But most Mastodon users can't imagine that at least some Fediverse users can pour thousands or even millions of characters into the message text.

Nonetheless, this gives the impression of Mastodon's culture demanding any and all extra information that people may need about an image be immediately delivered on a silver platter, along with the image.

Granted, if what the image shows is obscure enough, and especially if it also might make people curious enough, this appears to be justified. The former definitely does apply to my own original images, and chances are the latter applies, too. Technically speaking, my original images need a whole lot of explanation because nobody has ever even heard of what they show, and they also need highly detailed descriptions because nobody who can't see the image has even only the faintest idea of what anything in the image looks like.

So what I do is describe each one of my original images twice. One description is the long description; it's fully detailed, it contains transcripts of all bits of text within the borders of the image, and it contains all necessary explanations. It goes into the message text, and it's pretty much always a five-digit number of characters long.

The other description is shorter, and it goes into the alt-text in order to satisfy those alt-text hardliners who demand there be an actually descriptive alt-text even if there's an extremely detailed image description in the message text. I used to fill Mastodon's limit of 1,500 characters up almost or actually entirely. My future alt-texts might be limited to a bit over 500 characters because Misskey and its many forks delete alt-texts that are longer than 512 characters. (Then again, they also discard anything with a message text of over 10,000 characters, I think.)

Describing one image takes me from several hours up to two full days. I rarely receive any praise for this effort. But I guess the downside is that each original image that I post has the channel on which I post my original images now (as rarely as this happens) silently muted or blocked by a whole number of Mastodon users for exceeding the holy 500-character limit.

I try to play it safe. I try to always be ahead of Mastodon's alt-text police, far enough for them not to demand I edit the image descriptions of a three-year-old image post because they're sub-standard. So in addition to these monster descriptions, I have over 30 rules and guidelines for describing images and writing alt-texts that I adhere to as strictly as I possibly can. And yes, I also expect most of them to be enforced by the alt-text police sooner or later.

CC: @Princess Nettles Succubish

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonCulture

@✨pencilears✨(KD7POW)

I think a lot of people have unrealistically high expectations for alt text, and as a consequence they add a bunch of fluff, which makes writing alt-text feel daunting if that's the standard.

Looking at this phenomenon from outside of Mastodon (I'm on Hubzilla), I've got the impression that this has become engrained into Mastodon's very culture.

Mastodon has a limit of 1,500 characters so that the text in images with a lot of text can be transcribed in alt-text. However, many Mastodon users, knowing everything they know about online accessibility, take this as an invitation to write very detailed visual descriptions. Other Mastodon users cheer and applaud for these long descriptions.

Maybe it's just my impression. Maybe I'm wrong. But I kind of expect at least some Mastodon users to start both demanding and enforcing very long and detailed alt-texts/image descriptions, regardless of long alt-texts actually being bad for various reasons and even Mastodon users saying so.

I mean, I've already read several times that images must also be explained if their topic or their content is uncommon. In the alt-text, of course. Even though explanations in the alt-text are not accessible to people with certain disabilities. But most Mastodon users can't imagine that at least some Fediverse users can pour thousands or even millions of characters into the message text.

Nonetheless, this gives the impression of Mastodon's culture demanding any and all extra information that people may need about an image be immediately delivered on a silver platter, along with the image.

Granted, if what the image shows is obscure enough, and especially if it also might make people curious enough, this appears to be justified. The former definitely does apply to my own original images, and chances are the latter applies, too. Technically speaking, my original images need a whole lot of explanation because nobody has ever even heard of what they show, and they also need highly detailed descriptions because nobody who can't see the image has even only the faintest idea of what anything in the image looks like.

So what I do is describe each one of my original images twice. One description is the long description; it's fully detailed, it contains transcripts of all bits of text within the borders of the image, and it contains all necessary explanations. It goes into the message text, and it's pretty much always a five-digit number of characters long.

The other description is shorter, and it goes into the alt-text in order to satisfy those alt-text hardliners who demand there be an actually descriptive alt-text even if there's an extremely detailed image description in the message text. I used to fill Mastodon's limit of 1,500 characters up almost or actually entirely. My future alt-texts might be limited to a bit over 500 characters because Misskey and its many forks delete alt-texts that are longer than 512 characters. (Then again, they also discard anything with a message text of over 10,000 characters, I think.)

Describing one image takes me from several hours up to two full days. I rarely receive any praise for this effort. But I guess the downside is that each original image that I post has the channel on which I post my original images now (as rarely as this happens) silently muted or blocked by a whole number of Mastodon users for exceeding the holy 500-character limit.

I try to play it safe. I try to always be ahead of Mastodon's alt-text police, far enough for them not to demand I edit the image descriptions of a three-year-old image post because they're sub-standard. So in addition to these monster descriptions, I have over 30 rules and guidelines for describing images and writing alt-texts that I adhere to as strictly as I possibly can. And yes, I also expect most of them to be enforced by the alt-text police sooner or later.

CC: @Princess Nettles Succubish

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonCulture

@✨pencilears✨(KD7POW)

I think a lot of people have unrealistically high expectations for alt text, and as a consequence they add a bunch of fluff, which makes writing alt-text feel daunting if that's the standard.

Looking at this phenomenon from outside of Mastodon (I'm on Hubzilla), I've got the impression that this has become engrained into Mastodon's very culture.

Mastodon has a limit of 1,500 characters so that the text in images with a lot of text can be transcribed in alt-text. However, many Mastodon users, knowing everything they know about online accessibility, take this as an invitation to write very detailed visual descriptions. Other Mastodon users cheer and applaud for these long descriptions.

Maybe it's just my impression. Maybe I'm wrong. But I kind of expect at least some Mastodon users to start both demanding and enforcing very long and detailed alt-texts/image descriptions, regardless of long alt-texts actually being bad for various reasons and even Mastodon users saying so.

I mean, I've already read several times that images must also be explained if their topic or their content is uncommon. In the alt-text, of course. Even though explanations in the alt-text are not accessible to people with certain disabilities. But most Mastodon users can't imagine that at least some Fediverse users can pour thousands or even millions of characters into the message text.

Nonetheless, this gives the impression of Mastodon's culture demanding any and all extra information that people may need about an image be immediately delivered on a silver platter, along with the image.

Granted, if what the image shows is obscure enough, and especially if it also might make people curious enough, this appears to be justified. The former definitely does apply to my own original images, and chances are the latter applies, too. Technically speaking, my original images need a whole lot of explanation because nobody has ever even heard of what they show, and they also need highly detailed descriptions because nobody who can't see the image has even only the faintest idea of what anything in the image looks like.

So what I do is describe each one of my original images twice. One description is the long description; it's fully detailed, it contains transcripts of all bits of text within the borders of the image, and it contains all necessary explanations. It goes into the message text, and it's pretty much always a five-digit number of characters long.

The other description is shorter, and it goes into the alt-text in order to satisfy those alt-text hardliners who demand there be an actually descriptive alt-text even if there's an extremely detailed image description in the message text. I used to fill Mastodon's limit of 1,500 characters up almost or actually entirely. My future alt-texts might be limited to a bit over 500 characters because Misskey and its many forks delete alt-texts that are longer than 512 characters. (Then again, they also discard anything with a message text of over 10,000 characters, I think.)

Describing one image takes me from several hours up to two full days. I rarely receive any praise for this effort. But I guess the downside is that each original image that I post has the channel on which I post my original images now (as rarely as this happens) silently muted or blocked by a whole number of Mastodon users for exceeding the holy 500-character limit.

I try to play it safe. I try to always be ahead of Mastodon's alt-text police, far enough for them not to demand I edit the image descriptions of a three-year-old image post because they're sub-standard. So in addition to these monster descriptions, I have over 30 rules and guidelines for describing images and writing alt-texts that I adhere to as strictly as I possibly can. And yes, I also expect most of them to be enforced by the alt-text police sooner or later.

CC: @Princess Nettles Succubish

#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #FediMeta #FediverseMeta #CWFediMeta #CWFediverseMeta #CharacterLimit #CharacterLimits #CharacterLimitMeta #CWCharacterLimitMeta #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta #MastodonCulture