Advice/Help Can we prioritize accessibility?

[Chimney Swift]

BBcode is pretty awesome, I will grant you.
You can add all sort of fancy sliders, fun fonts, columns and images and formatting oh my! It is fun, I grant you. But I notice a lot of people getting a little carried away with prettying up posts, at the cost that they may be anywhere from annoying to illegible for people on mobile, as well as disabled RPers.

I don't just mean the infinitesimally small font sizes.
I mean the conflicting and bright color schemes. I mean putting text over complex or dark images, making sliders and buttons that cannot be manipulated by people with fine motor issues. I mean huge images that have unlabelled button functions that might take someone an hour to figure out.

I especially mean uploading text as a goddamn image file that can't be highlighted for transfer to text-to-speech or a document.

Over the months I've had to reach out to RP players and creators several times. You'd be surprised how reluctant and beleaguered people can get over being asked to have the text of a CS or post uncoded and image-free, in a spoiler under their code. Alternatively, you could simplify your code into a format with only a few sliders, in a serif font on a white or plain background, but I think most people would prefer if they just do what they want, and leave me the text at the bottom, ja?

That's literally all it takes to make a post accessible to visually impaired, dyslexic, learning or developmentally disabled people. As well as people on mobile devices.

So why isn't this de riguer? It takes 30 seconds of your time to save someone an aneurysm trying to read through your code.
Don't make your post a labyrinth.

 

[Idea]

I have to say I agree with the above post almost entirely. There really is very little reason not to, I think, and with the exceptions of code too simple to really warrant a whole spoiler in my mind (if I'm just giving it a background and a border, and the background constrasts with the letters enough to be readable for instance) , I do do this.

However, I do feel the need to point out, for the sake of bringing it up (as the issue isn't 100% one sided) that sometimes the coding may be part of the fun. For instance, in my quest roleplay, I used a coding by which the buttons led to more information and the borders on said buttons indicated their relative expense considering a set points the players had as a collective. While evenin this case, I still left a mostly code-free phone friendly version at the bottom (just with a couple tabs) I do see those buttons as part of the appeal. So I do agree we should always keep in mind those who may struggle with the code, but I don't think we should always make it a priority- So long as I am willing to take the loss of those people attention, I don't owe anyone to stop using god bright colors just because someone somewhere doesn't want to read with open lights.

 

[Chimney Swift]

I have to say I agree with the above post almost entirely. There really is very little reason not to, I think, and with the exceptions of code too simple to really warrant a whole spoiler in my mind (if I'm just giving it a background and a border, and the background constrasts with the letters enough to be readable for instance) , I do do this.

However, I do feel the need to point out, for the sake of bringing it up (as the issue isn't 100% one sided) that sometimes the coding may be part of the fun. For instance, in my quest roleplay, I used a coding by which the buttons led to more information and the borders on said buttons indicated their relative expense considering a set points the players had as a collective. While evenin this case, I still left a mostly code-free phone friendly version at the bottom (just with a couple tabs) I do see those buttons as part of the appeal. So I do agree we should always keep in mind those who may struggle with the code, but I don't think we should always make it a priority- So long as I am willing to take the loss of those people attention, I don't owe anyone to stop using god bright colors just because someone somewhere doesn't want to read with open lights.

Oh, I definitely agree with you on the first part. People should be able to code however they want, as long as they're considerate enough to provide all the plain text in a spoiler. I get that coding is a lot of fun, and it's totally okay if people want to get creative and complex with it, especially if the other players are also into it.

The problem comes from making posts that literally cannot read by someone with a disability or on mobile, and copping an attitude when the bare minimum of accommodations is requested. Roleplaying is a cooperative format. If you're creating something that is inaccessible, you're ruining the fun not only for that person but for the whole group. Believe me, there have been points where I literally had to find in-character reasons why my characters wouldn't interact with other players' characters, just because I couldn't read their code or find a way to transfer it to a more accessible format. That creates a system where my characters get isolated from the group, and eventually from the game itself. That kind of exclusion is pretty shitty to deal with, especially when the solution takes 0 effort from the poster and doesn't even require them to change their coding. All I ask is to have a fair shot at participation, really.

 

[Idea]

Oh, I definitely agree with you on the first part. People should be able to code however they want, as long as they're considerate enough to provide all the plain text in a spoiler. I get that coding is a lot of fun, and it's totally okay if people want to get creative and complex with it, especially if the other players are also into it.

The problem comes from making posts that literally cannot read by someone with a disability or on mobile, and copping an attitude when the bare minimum of accommodations is requested. Roleplaying is a cooperative format. If you're creating something that is inaccessible, you're ruining the fun not only for that person but for the whole group. Believe me, there have been points where I literally had to find in-character reasons why my characters wouldn't interact with other players' characters, just because I couldn't read their code or find a way to transfer it to a more accessible format. That creates a system where my characters get isolated from the group, and eventually from the game itself. That kind of exclusion is pretty shitty to deal with, especially when the solution takes 0 effort from the poster and doesn't even require them to change their coding. All I ask is to have a fair shot at participation, really.

Yes, of course. If someone you're already RPing with is making a post you can't read and can't be bothered to provide a plain version, that's disrespectful. However I want to clarify I was speaking more of things like posts where you aren't yet engaged with the roleplayer or roleplay, say, interest checks, as well as any post where the coding is mobile friendly and not overly advanced.

On the first case at times it may happen that the coding is essential for the effect the interest check or major post is supposed to have, rare as it may be. However, even if that wasn't the case, and while I do agree it's still better to provide some way of accessing the roleplay, I don't think anyone owes you anything for a preference (even if that preference is the result of a biological need). For instance, I absolutely despite demons in roleplays. I can't stand them for reasons that aren't currently relevant other than it has to do with my religious beliefs. It is therefore my responsibility and right o avoid roleplays where I Igor be upset by that. No one should have to purposefully avoid demons just because I have a problem with them, unless they want to attract me to their roleplay. Likewise, unless they want to broaden their audience to those who have the aforementioned disabilities or are on mobile, they don't owe to anyone to get their coding in any way.

Just stating again, this is on things like search threads, or on posts with relatively simple coding or the like, where there is no agreement of anyone to be part of anything with anyone yet or if there is, there is no information indicating someone might have some special need.

 

[Chimney Swift]

On the first case at times it may happen that the coding is essential for the effect the interest check or major post is supposed to have, rare as it may be. However, even if that wasn't the case, and while I do agree it's still better to provide some way of accessing the roleplay, I don't think anyone owes you anything for a preference (even if that preference is the result of a biological need). For instance, I absolutely despite demons in roleplays. I can't stand them for reasons that aren't currently relevant other than it has to do with my religious beliefs. It is therefore my responsibility and right o avoid roleplays where I Igor be upset by that. No one should have to purposefully avoid demons just because I have a problem with them, unless they want to attract me to their roleplay. Likewise, unless they want to broaden their audience to those who have the aforementioned disabilities or are on mobile, they don't owe to anyone to get their coding in any way.

Just stating again, this is on things like search threads, or on posts with relatively simple coding or the like, where there is no agreement of anyone to be part of anything with anyone yet or if there is, there is no information indicating someone might have some special need.

This is a fair argument, but when nearly every role play, regardless of plot or content, is plagued by inaccessible bbcode, this point becomes irrelevant.
It is easy to avoid games involving demons. Simply join or create games that exist in realms where demonic creatures do not exist. Worst case scenario, avoid "fantasy" roleplays.

It is not easy to avoid people who use complex code. It is also not easy to tell them to stop or provide a means of accessing the post, because as you said they have a right to code however they want and I really have no authority over it, sometimes even in my own games. I often have no idea when I join a game whether or not I will be able to participate and read all the material.

That isn't fair.

 

[Zazz]

Yes, of course. If someone you're already RPing with is making a post you can't read and can't be bothered to provide a plain version, that's disrespectful. However I want to clarify I was speaking more of things like posts where you aren't yet engaged with the roleplayer or roleplay, say, interest checks, as well as any post where the coding is mobile friendly and not overly advanced.

On the first case at times it may happen that the coding is essential for the effect the interest check or major post is supposed to have, rare as it may be. However, even if that wasn't the case, and while I do agree it's still better to provide some way of accessing the roleplay, I don't think anyone owes you anything for a preference (even if that preference is the result of a biological need). For instance, I absolutely despite demons in roleplays. I can't stand them for reasons that aren't currently relevant other than it has to do with my religious beliefs. It is therefore my responsibility and right o avoid roleplays where I Igor be upset by that. No one should have to purposefully avoid demons just because I have a problem with them, unless they want to attract me to their roleplay. Likewise, unless they want to broaden their audience to those who have the aforementioned disabilities or are on mobile, they don't owe to anyone to get their coding in any way.

Just stating again, this is on things like search threads, or on posts with relatively simple coding or the like, where there is no agreement of anyone to be part of anything with anyone yet or if there is, there is no information indicating someone might have some special need.

Did you seriously just equate religion to disabilities?

There is a huge difference between "my god says this is bad so I don't want to participate" and "i literally cannot participate because of a physical condition".

 

[Kaerri]

Did you seriously just equate religion to disabilities?

No, Idea was simply comparing one preference to another (dislike of demons to dislike of excessive BBcode).

 

[Zazz]

No, Idea was simply comparing one preference to another (dislike of demons to dislike of excessive BBcode).

If you read the original post, you would see that the "dislike" of excessive coding is due to disabilities. I would hope that someone as eloquent as Idea would have seen that, too, and therefore, why the hell would they have been comparing it as a dislike?

 

[Kaerri]

There's no need to get hostile. I did in fact read all posts in this thread before replying, and it was my understanding that the discussion is about "mere" dislike of too much BBcode and actual inability to read some posts with too much BBcode.

 

[Chimney Swift]

There's no need to get hostile. I did in fact read all posts in this thread before replying, and it was my understanding that the discussion is about "mere" dislike of too much BBcode and actual inability to read some posts with too much BBcode.

Well, not really.
It's mostly about people like myself with visual disabilities that make reading anything other than plain Times New Roman text extremely difficult, people who use adapted devices (again, due to disability) who can't maneuver hidden buttons and multiple layers of links and sliders, and also people without access to non-mobile devices who can't read the broken code.
This wasn't about people who just prefer the aesthetic of uncoded posts.

 

[Kaerri]

Ah. Sorry, Chimney. I do think it's very rude of people not to accommodate accessibility issues even after being asked. I'd probably drop the RP myself if I see that happening even though I don't have those issues, because I don't like being around people who are that inconsiderate.

 

[Zazz]

Phew. I was about to copy and paste half the post.

And, I apologize if I came across as hostile. I was going more for incredulous and flabbergasted, and then calmly stating a point.

 

[rae2nerdy]

I think Ideas point was that when it comes to general searches coding should be seen as a preference.

And when it comes to a preference having certain people excluded isn’t really a justification for changing something you like.

Because chances are the individual will consider the loss of those who can’t read the codes acceptable in the hunt for those who enjoy codes as much as them.

Now in the case of group roleplays I reccomend talking to the GM when you first join up. Tell them your visibility issues and ask them to work in a policy for the roleplay. If you are the GM simply forbid bbcode altogether.

Taking to the individuals isn’t getting you anywhere so go up the chain of command.

If the GM isn’t working with you than you might have to leave the roleplay.

You might try 1x1 as well. Those mostly take place in pms which can’t really handle a lot of codes anyway. And even the ones in threads rarely have that elaborate codes.

 

[Zazz]

And when it comes to a preference having certain people excluded isn’t really a justification for changing something you like.

Sure, but we're not really discussing preferences. We've established that point.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Sure, but we're not really discussing preferences. We've established that point.

The point is that not everyone cares about accessibility. Because they will consider those who can’t access something to not into their preferred group of partners anyway.

 

[Zazz]

And thus, Trump exists as president.

 

[Chimney Swift]

The point is that not everyone cares about accessibility. Because they will consider those who can’t access something to not into their preferred group of partners anyway.

Excluding disabled roleplayers because you can't put one (1) spoiler of plain text under your pretty code?
I'm sorry, but that's in poor taste.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Which is what both Idea and I were getting at. The accessibility concern is addressed by the preference.

Because search threads specifically are not meant to be universally accessible. The whole point is to narrow the applicants against a preferred criteria.


Now I will go further and state that is also part of the problem in individual posts as well although admittedly in a much more rude and deliberate manner.

The thing is the people who use elaborate codes prefer this aesthetic. So they are going to prioritize making their posts pretty over making them readable.

So when you ask them to change these posts (for whatever reason) they are going to push back because your asking them to change something that they prioritize as important.

So yeah the preference aspect is important as it explains why these people are not making changes to be more accessible.

Because they are saying in so many words (or actions) that my preference is more important to me than your accessibility.

 

[Chimney Swift]

Which is what both Idea and I were getting at. The accessibility concern is addressed by the preference.

Because search threads specifically are not meant to be universally accessible. The whole point is to narrow the applicants against a preferred criteria.


Now I will go further and state that is also part of the problem in individual posts as well although admittedly in a much more rude and deliberate manner.

The thing is the people who use elaborate codes prefer this aesthetic. So they are going to prioritize making their posts pretty over making them readable.

So when you ask them to change these posts (for whatever reason) they are going to push back because your asking them to change something that they prioritize as important.

So yeah the preference aspect is important as it explains why these people are not making changes to be more accessible.

Because they are saying in so many words (or actions) that my preference is more important to me than your accessibility.

But here's the thing: roleplaying is a collaborative writing activity. In order for an RP to work, all players must be able to easily understand each post. For some people, they can easily read through code. Others need to be able to read the text in a more accessible format. If pretty posts are more important than the other players, what even is the point of RP? Just go make art.

I reiterate: All it takes to make a post accessible is to provide the text in a plain format at some point in the post. You can code all you want in whatever way you want. It only takes 30 seconds to be decent to disabled roleplayers.

 

[Zazz]

I rp with someone who uses code, and I'm on mobile, so it lookes like three words to a line, a buttload of scrolling, and hard to read text. They have the decency to add a spoiler with just the text, no code. It makes life so much easier. And as Chimney states, RPs are meant to include other writers by nature; why would one purposely go out of their way to exclude someone? It seems only harmful to the coder, excluding themself from perhaps having a much more interesting story. Stupidity, really.

 

[Idea]

This is a fair argument, but when nearly every role play, regardless of plot or content, is plagued by inaccessible bbcode, this point becomes irrelevant.
It is easy to avoid games involving demons. Simply join or create games that exist in realms where demonic creatures do not exist. Worst case scenario, avoid "fantasy" roleplays.

It is not easy to avoid people who use complex code. It is also not easy to tell them to stop or provide a means of accessing the post, because as you said they have a right to code however they want and I really have no authority over it, sometimes even in my own games. I often have no idea when I join a game whether or not I will be able to participate and read all the material.

That isn't fair.

True, it isn't fair that you do not get to participate in as many roleplays as other people. However, that unfairness is , in the cases I pointed out at least, not the responsibility of the people in question. They are the result of life's unfairness which while we do not have to contribute to, we aren't responsible for avoiding on a case by case scenario.

Is it easy avoiding a scenario where demons exist? Not as much as you may think, but perhaps easier than avoiding the code thing. Allow me then to approach this by a different angle.

Take the people who came to the site looking to roleplaying a very specific , but very niche fandom. Recently there's been a small wave of threads complaining about the lack of interest in those. The reason is simple: people don't want to roleplay those fandoms, either because they know them and aren't interested or because they don't know them or because the terms of the roleplay do not correspond to something they find acceptable. The question that i pose then is the following: Do people in general have any obligation, or any more obligation to create content of that fandom (that they don't want to do) for the sake of satisfying those people just because there is a lack of offer?

The answer is no. Now this doesn't necessarily imply that the needs of those with disabilities shouldn't be accounted for. Merely, that they don't have any more of a right to anything just because there is a lack of roleplays to meet their demands.

Again, I will repeat: If your coding isn't simple, if you don't know people are not being able to read your thing, and if nothing in your code is necessary to convey the point you want to convey, yet you insist on not at least adding something for people to read your post, then you're a dick. If you know you're gonna be roleplaying with someone who has a specific problem whose details they told you about, and you still do the code that hurts them, that better be an accident. But in the situations where this isn't the case, the person has absolutely no obligation to anyone to code any differently than they like.

PS: Sorry about the delay on my response. Currently on a trip and my chances to post are spotty. I'd like to mention by the way, that there is a way to read any post no matter how much coding it has. This is not to argue, just to help. If you turn off the rich editor (I'll post a pic when I can to highlight what this is) , and click at the bottom right of the post in question "reply" this will automatically quote the post, which with the editor turned off will be presented as the code text and normal text, both plain. Hope this helps.

 

[rae2nerdy]

But here's the thing: roleplaying is a collaborative writing activity. In order for an RP to work, all players must be able to easily understand each post. For some people, they can easily read through code. Others need to be able to read the text in a more accessible format. If pretty posts are more important than the other players, what even is the point of RP? Just go make art.

I reiterate: All it takes to make a post accessible is to provide the text in a plain format at some point in the post. You can code all you want in whatever way you want. It only takes 30 seconds to be decent to disabled roleplayers.

But my point is that roleplay isn’t accessible.

Like people who make these posts do not care about accessibility. If they cared they wouldn’t make the elaborate posts in the first place.

Because even able bodied roleplayers on desktops can’t read these easily never mind anyone with a visual impairment, small screen, or mobility issues.

So if no one can easily read these ( as that’s not the point of the posts) than expecting them to make them easier to read is missing the point.

To reiterate they do not care.

They just don’t.

And I think that’s stupid and exlusionary too. I hate elaborate posts cuz I can’t read them any better on a desktop with decent eyesight than you can read them with poor eyesight on a smaller screen.

But the point is these people don’t care about me or you. They are not writing posts so that we can read them.

They are making posts for other people to admire their code skills.

Hence why they don’t do the thirty seconds of work to make a plain text version.

Because it’s not about the text. It’s about making things pretty.

The way you can tell if it is about the text?

They do put a plain text version that is available. Or they change their codes.

If they won’t do that then you know it’s not about the content it’s about the decoration

 

[Chimney Swift]

True, it isn't fair that you do not get to participate in as many roleplays as other people. However, that unfairness is , in the cases I pointed out at least, not the responsibility of the people in question. They are the result of life's unfairness which while we do not have to contribute to, we aren't responsible for avoiding on a case by case scenario.

Is it easy avoiding a scenario where demons exist? Not as much as you may think, but perhaps easier than avoiding the code thing. Allow me then to approach this by a different angle.

Take the people who came to the site looking to roleplaying a very specific , but very niche fandom. Recently there's been a small wave of threads complaining about the lack of interest in those. The reason is simple: people don't want to roleplay those fandoms, either because they know them and aren't interested or because they don't know them or because the terms of the roleplay do not correspond to something they find acceptable. The question that i pose then is the following: Do people in general have any obligation, or any more obligation to create content of that fandom (that they don't want to do) for the sake of satisfying those people just because there is a lack of offer?

The answer is no. Now this doesn't necessarily imply that the needs of those with disabilities shouldn't be accounted for. Merely, that they don't have any more of a right to anything just because there is a lack of roleplays to meet their demands.

Again, I will repeat: If your coding isn't simple, if you don't know people are not being able to read your thing, and if nothing in your code is necessary to convey the point you want to convey, yet you insist on not at least adding something for people to read your post, then you're a dick. If you know you're gonna be roleplaying with someone who has a specific problem whose details they told you about, and you still do the code that hurts them, that better be an accident. But in the situations where this isn't the case, the person has absolutely no obligation to anyone to code any differently than they like.

PS: Sorry about the delay on my response. Currently on a trip and my chances to post are spotty. I'd like to mention by the way, that there is a way to read any post no matter how much coding it has. This is not to argue, just to help. If you turn off the rich editor (I'll post a pic when I can to highlight what this is) , and click at the bottom right of the post in question "reply" this will automatically quote the post, which with the editor turned off will be presented as the code text and normal text, both plain. Hope this helps.

You seem to be getting the idea, but you're missing one important point: It is entirely your responsibility, as a roleplayer, to make your posts accessible. You are 100% accountable for that. Especially since it takes no effort on your part.

I've said over and over and over again that you can code however you want as long as your posts are accessible, whether that be by providing a plain-text version in a spoiler or by simplifying the code. It doesn't matter. Nobody's asking you to never do anything fun or pretty. We're just asking that you be considerate by doing the simplest possible thing to make your roleplay accessible. Because, as I've said no less than twice now, it's a cooperative activity that relies on player accessibility.

Oh man, I have to repeat myself a lot on this thread.

 

[Idea]

Zazz Kaerri to make my stance clear about the whole religion topic.

Religion is something I would give my life for. To me and many other pious people around the globe, religion is more than a matter of life or death. There are extensive differences between a disability and a religious issue, however my point wasn't that a necessity you have no choice over (something present in both cases) does not equal a right to demand of someone to accommodate it. It's still better if they do, and if they don't stand to loose anything by doing so, they should, but if their ideas would be harmed by it, then it's more than acceptable.

I would also like to state , yet again, who I was referring to. I made a point of relating this even, but the ones I was talking about were not just anybody. I was referring to people who are just making search threads (they have no compromise to you yet or possibility of awareness of your specific problem), people whose message needs the code for some reason (they can't physically convey what they want to without that bit of code) or people whose coding is already pretty simple and have not been informed of any problem their partner(s) may have.

 

[Zazz]

I just... never mind. It's not worth it.