Advice/Help Can we prioritize accessibility?

[Idea]

I wasn't referring to anything you said except what I quoted, simply on the basis that it was misrepresenting the points me and geeking we're trying to argue.

 

[Alteras]

If you read my other post I also clarified that users may have reasons to not include a spoiler (code breaking, lack of coding skill to resolve code breaking, etc). However if someone is inquiring about options for a plain text version it doesn't always mean "use a spoiler." I think you misunderstood my point, but I also have posted previously and it was misread.

The assumption is the general userbase doesn't take into consideration of readability regarding coding. They code and leave it at that, hence why someone may, as I mentioned, inquire about a plain text option. Whether it is a spoiler or just a PM with the plain text or some other compromise. As I've said, it's ignorance and not maliciousness that many may not include a spoiler until the matter is discussed or brought up to them. From that point they can either accommodate or refuse.

Somehow between the first post and the recent ones the subject became turned into a discussion about entitlement and users demanding users to stop coding for their comfort. The OP made the point of it doesn't take much time to offer a spoiler/plain text version, though there are circumstances where if a post is buried under 800 pages of code it can be, but that's for users like Alteras XD The OP also stated they had inquired when they wished to join but couldn't read the posts, which is fine to inquire imo.

The bare bones of this matter is a visually impaired player, or even a normal sighted player, can have difficulty reading coded posts and that is it reasonable to inquire for plain text in those cases. It would be reasonable to offer a spoiler with a plain text version if someone asks due to readability issues, but not required if you are not inclined to do so for whatever reason. Which we've agreed it is within the right of the coding player if they don't want to offer it.

I feel like we're just discussing in circles at this point and not actually getting to the center because people are perhaps misunderstanding points others are making.

Anyway, this is gonna be my last reply here. I've said my piece and offered what I hope is a tool that can help the OP and others in this situation to give them better accessibility.

lol.

Visual difficulties due to code is both a coding and a design problem. Not every coder is a designer, and not every designer is a good designer. Recent additions to BBCode have made it easier to code for different types of screens and readable for different types of people, but going through the effort of doing so can be time consuming. For my more recent codes, making the code legible on any screen now occupies about 2/3rd of my coding decision, and adds an additional 1k lines of code to 3k lines project.

The accessibility issue is something that all coders have been grappling with since the inception of the internet. Certainly a spoiler containing plain text is one solution, but to put it another way, it's the equivalent of saying, "hey, your code sucks." Now imagine being forced to go through your own hard work and delete 80-90% of it just to display the text without the coding parts. Unfortunately, it is the easiest solution so it is inevitable that there will be push back.

The proposed solution of using reading mode is good but only works well for certain browsers. The spoiler tag is usually an after thought to most people. So we return to just coding it better, which is heavily reliant on coding skill, designing sense, and a good computer.

Simply put, it's gonna be a problem that can only really be solved through awareness.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Yeah I think at this point we're all just arguing about the fact that we're not arguing.

I've said my piece on the matter but once more for the last of us.

I am not accusing anyone of saying anything.I was merely pointing out that accessibility is not a blanket situation which is easily resolved with one solution. As there are exceptions to every rule.

So yes in general it would be nice if everything was accessible. But sometimes it won't be. And that doesn't automatically mean that someone is being excluded on purpose.

 

[jinkx]

i’ve only skimmed this thread briefly but i think at the end of the day, this is a roleplaying site. while the visual presentation is of great value to some people, it is actually the content which is important. and if you’re going to be involved in a group roleplay, you’ve got to be willing to make that content accessible to others in the group.

i’m not saying “don’t use code, it’s bad”. i’m saying if you want to write in a group, you have to be willing to adapt your writing so it’s accessible to other members of the group.

ask the people in your roleplay if your posts are okay to read. ask them if you should adapt anything in your post. maybe it’s disappointing that you can’t use the coding exactly the way you planned but you’ve gotta be willing to compromise if you wanna work in a group.

those are just my thoughts on the matter. i’m not particularly interested in engaging in debate over it right now (call me close-minded if you wish) but i thought y’all might value another opinion on the matter.

 

[Chimney Swift]

And my thought Is If the roleplay says code required and you can’t do code for any reason. Than you don’t join/paricipate in that roleplay.

Because you are asking someone to remove a criteria of their roleplay for you and you alone.

Because presumably if you cannot read code you also can’t make code.

This isn’t the same as going to a roleplay where there isn’t no such rule and demanding people change their posts to make them readable. Absolutely you can do that.

But code is important to certain roleplays. Whether it is built into the play function, just an aspect the GM prefers to use in their roleplay for uniformity, or whatever.

The point is that it doesn’t matter WHY someone requires codes. They are perfectly within their rights to do so.

And going up to those people and demanding they remove something important to them just so one single person can join their roleplay is rude and entitled as hell. And aAit would be removing something because presumably if you can’t read code you also can’t create code. So then what sense does it make to allow one person to not follow the code rule hell

When there are a dang near unlimited supply of roleplays and a majority of them don’t have a code requirement.

So the fact that you are going to target the one kind of roleplay that you can’t participate in and make them change their set up to suit you is frankly vile

Note : I am using the general you in this case. I’m not saying anyone is actually doing this. I am saying that if they are it’s rude and entitled as hell.

Okay, I'm a little upset now.

For the last time. Nobody asked anyone to remove code, and I certainly have not been targeting code heavy roleplays and fighting with GMs. I don't know how you came to the conclusion that I was doing that.

You're accusing me of basically bullying code users, which was neither something that I had been doing in the past nor what I am doing here. You're using inflammatory language, taking what I'm saying completely out of context and putting words in our mouths to try to make it seem like I'm being aggressive or trying to make something away from people. The only one being aggressive and uncompromising here is you.

To date, I have demanded no one to change their set up. If I cannot read someone's posts, I will ask once, politely, for a plain text spoiler. If they refuse and I can't participate due to illegible code, I simply leave the game without a fuss. Mods and anyone who reads my post history can back me up on this.

If all you want to do is make unfounded attacks on my character, please leave this thread and let the rest of us try to peacefully problem solve.

 

[Shuusuke]

I think what's been going on here is mostly a case of playing devil's advocate gone too far.

It's been said why it would be nice to have a code-free version of a post. Simpler to read for people who couldn't care less about coding, and readable for people who actually couldn't read it otherwise.
It's been said why people might resist posting a text-only version of their post. They may not care at all about accessibility, they may not have a text-only version with them and not be willing to go through the trouble of deconstructing the code themselves, they may think said code is essential to what they're trying to convey, it may be part of their style that they're unwilling to part with.
It's been said what the current alternatives are, when the poster doesn't do it, for any of the reasons mentioned above. You can rely on an extension, you can quote the post and toggle the code in the editor. Neither is a perfect solution, but it's something you can do yourself without relying on someone else's cooperation.
It's been proposed a potential function to view a post without any coding, automating the process, and the design aspect has been explained.

And that's about the summary of this thread, snark, hostility, pride, and everything else negative aside. No one was saying that people with disabilities have no right to be able to read posts, no one said that people that like their aesthetics have no right to RP. Both sides of this discussion have been presented and it's definitely possible to understand where both of them are coming from, even if you agree with one more than with the other.

All that said, hopefully this doesn't go more sideways than it already has. Kept having déjà vu as I was reading this thread, and not in a good way. The topic is something that's beneficial to everyone, even if not necessary for everyone.

 

[The Mechanist]

As I said before, if you can’t code right don’t code at all, practice on your own time till it works. Or at least until a spoiler tag doesn’t make your post implode

 

[adrian_]

Holy shit, this is an interesting debate.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Okay, I'm a little upset now.

For the last time. Nobody asked anyone to remove code, and I certainly have not been targeting code heavy roleplays and fighting with GMs. I don't know how you came to the conclusion that I was doing that.

You're accusing me of basically bullying code users, which was neither something that I had been doing in the past nor what I am doing here. You're using inflammatory language, taking what I'm saying completely out of context and putting words in our mouths to try to make it seem like I'm being aggressive or trying to make something away from people. The only one being aggressive and uncompromising here is you.

To date, I have demanded no one to change their set up. If I cannot read someone's posts, I will ask once, politely, for a plain text spoiler. If they refuse and I can't participate due to illegible code, I simply leave the game without a fuss. Mods and anyone who reads my post history can back me up on this.

If all you want to do is make unfounded attacks on my character, please leave this thread and let the rest of us try to peacefully problem solve.

Hon. It's called the general you. I was not attacking you. I specifically stated that several times.

To clarify the general you means that I am talking about a hypothetical person in a situation.

I am not saying Chimney Swift is a mean ole meanie head who goes around making unrealistic demands.

I am saying that if anyone joins a roleplay where they are specifically not welcome due to some kind of criteria and try to change that criteria than they're being jerks.

 

[Chimney Swift]

Hon. It's called the general you. I was not attacking you. I specifically stated that several times.

To clarify the general you means that I am talking about a hypothetical person in a situation.

I am not saying Chimney Swift is a mean ole meanie head who goes around making unrealistic demands.

I am saying that if anyone joins a roleplay where they are specifically not welcome due to some kind of criteria and try to change that criteria than they're being jerks.

Regardless of whether those comments were directed at me specifically, they were off-topic and inflammatory because nobody was ever insinuating that those kinds of behaviors were taking place.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Regardless of whether those comments were directed at me specifically, they were off-topic and inflammatory because nobody was ever insinuating that those kinds of behaviors were taking place.

You asked for a clarification of the point Idea and I were talking about. Idea clarified their point and I clarified my own.

I could perhaps have worded it better but the point was not a new one. I’d repeated it it feels like half a dozen times already.

But as I believe we are all just arguing semantics I’ll leave the thread

 

[Chimney Swift]

You asked for a clarification of the point Idea and I were talking about. Idea clarified their point and I clarified my own.

I could perhaps have worded it better but the point was not a new one. I’d repeated it it feels like half a dozen times already.

But as I believe we are all just arguing semantics I’ll leave the thread

This is my final reply to you (if you wish to argue this further, my PM box is open): I did not ask for clarification, and neither Idea nor anyone else in this thread ever implied anything about people deliberately targeting code heavy RPs to start arguments/demand amendments from GMs. The only one who ever brought that up was you.

The only one who ever talked about "removing criteria" or "fundamentally changing" or "targeting" coded RPs to suit players was you.

I would like to point out that Idea, the mods, and everyone else on this thread has been civil and productive, regardless of their view on the topic. I'm not calling you out because you disagree with me. I'm calling you out because your behavior on this thread has been completely inappropriate.

If you attempt to derail this thread again with inflammatory and off-topic accusations, you will be blocked without further comment. I really didn't want this thread to devolve into a petty argument.

 

[pasta]

honestly, if i want to code, i can code. i like my posts to look pretty, and i like to improve my coding skills. if you need a mobile version, just ask, and i'll give it to you. but, if my interest check code is advanced chances are everyone in the rp will use coding. if you really are interested in the rp, just ask everyone be considerate and put their texts in a spoiler under a code.

 

[Chimney Swift]

honestly, if i want to code, i can code. i like my posts to look pretty, and i like to improve my coding skills. if you need a mobile version, just ask, and i'll give it to you. but, if my interest check code is advanced chances are everyone in the rp will use coding. if you really are interested in the rp, just ask everyone be considerate and put their texts in a spoiler under a code.

Of course.
I mean, for the record, there's definitely ways to code that both look nice and is legible. Basically any code that is single-scroll and uses a standard size font on a light-colored background will be readable to most people.

But really, how someone wants to code should be their choice. If they want to have pastel pink Size 5 cursive font superimposed on a dark blurry photograph, they can go ahead and do that. The only thing I ask is that if I can't read it, I'd like to be provided a way to access the text of the post.

 

[rae2nerdy]

This is my final reply to you (if you wish to argue this further, my PM box is open): I did not ask for clarification, and neither Idea nor anyone else in this thread ever implied anything about people deliberately targeting code heavy RPs to start arguments/demand amendments from GMs. The only one who ever brought that up was you.

The only one who ever talked about "removing criteria" or "fundamentally changing" or "targeting" coded RPs to suit players was you.

I would like to point out that Idea, the mods, and everyone else on this thread has been civil and productive, regardless of their view on the topic. I'm not calling you out because you disagree with me. I'm calling you out because your behavior on this thread has been completely inappropriate.

If you attempt to derail this thread again with inflammatory and off-topic accusations, you will be blocked without further comment. I really didn't want this thread to devolve into a petty argument.

And I have tried to get out of this gracefully three times. I would like you to block me from now on as I am done talking to you.

 

[Cactus22]

I'm with you. If I have to read through a bunch of coding nonsense to get to a post I move on to someone else.

 

[Sara Sidereal]

I've decided to implement a "no code, default font size and color only" rule in all interest checks I post