Talon
Quin@talon Yes! Twitterrific can do this, and I love it!
Violet@talon I agree this is much needed. I wish current apps had this feature.
Lynette@talon Yes! Yes! That would be a much appreciated feature.
Darius Kazemi@talon Good idea. I have added this to Hometown as a feature request:
Toggle to filter all media that lacks media descriptions · Issue #1218 · hometown-fork/hometown
Pitch Add a toggle to the Home timeline that filters out posts that have media but lack media descriptions (image descriptions, audio descriptions, etc). Alternately, a toggle in user preferences, ...
@darius @talon The one thing that worries me about this: it could end up decreasing alt-text. If my followers post without alt-text, and I just filter those posts out, I never ask them to include it (because I didn't realize I missed posts from them), and they feel like they don't have to include it because they know I'll never encounter the image they didn't describe. So screen reader users just get left out and nobody notices or complains.
@fastfinge @talon good point - I imagine that, like many filters, it's something that an individual would turn off and on based on their energy levels for dealing with the thing they are filtering
@darius @talon It would be too easy to turn it on and forget it, especially if it's a global filter somewhere in prefferences that just applies to everything. If it was that, I'd want a warning like "48 of your followers filter out undescribed media, and your post will be hidden from them!" for anyone posting a toot.
@fastfinge @talon both of these are good points. I'm definitely leaning toward putting it in the home timeline instead of user settings for the reasons you mentioned.
@darius @fastfinge to be honest, I didn't expect that post to get as much reach as it did, and I'm also a bit worried that people will start using it as an excuse. But I still want the ability to filter that stuff out. It's happening more and more, and I'd really just not want to see it anymore if I can't get people to describe it.
@fastfinge @darius This is a social problem. Even if you force people to include an image description, they will just put anything at all in that box to satisfy the requirement. I fully agree that we should be vocal about this, but I also just don't always have the energy to do that. Just like how we can filter posts by keywords, I think we should have the option to filter posts by alt text or not. The same argument could hold true to that. Don't want to see X? Just filter it. Does that mean we shouldn't have filters either?
@fastfinge @darius part of the idea of hosting my own social media is that I can set it up the way I want. If I were to reply to every undescribed image I encounter on Fedi I'd do nothing else. That's just not how I want to use the platform all the time.
@fastfinge @darius I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I definitely see your point, and I agree with it to some extent, but I'd rather have a pleasant experience in my timeline when I choose to do so. And this same problem still persists. If you filter keywords, you might accidentally post something from someone that regularly posts about the thing you have filtered.
@fastfinge let's see if I can find some emojis that would work in context of an unreasonable argument. Um... maybe these?
There we go. I win the argument?!
There we go. I win the argument?!
@talon I can't wait until these have cross-instance alt-text. 
Because I have all of the angry and sad pony emotes. 
Because I have all of the angry and sad pony emotes. @fastfinge makes me sad that the GitHub issue has been up for a good 2 or 3 years without even a comment from a developer.
@talon Agreed. Though I'm not sure I want much detail on some of these. They're more detailed than standard emoji, and hearing Twilight Sparkle's angry face described 9 times could get annoying fast. Do we finally have a use for the longdesc attribute in HTML? LOL
@fastfinge either that, or clicking/activating an emoji could open additional info about it like the description.
@talon Also, like, "Twilight Sparkle's angry face" means something to me. But if you're on another instance, do you need to know that Twilight Sparkle is an animated My Little Pony? That can be assumed knowledge here. But not elsewhere. So...it's one of those problems that is more complex than it first seems.
@fastfinge I think it's another context thing. In normal conversation where emoji would be used, not knowing who twilight sparkle was might not be as important. once it was, I could look it up. But yeah, this is more of an art than a science.
@talon Yup. Though honestly The My Little Pony fanbase has a reputation. Just using pony emoji is a flex in and of itself. It tends to change conversations when used with people on other instances. So you could argue that in this case it's something you need to know to have the same reaction to it that a sighted viewer would. Whereas something like just dragon themed emoji is maybe less important? So yeah. It depends.
@fastfinge even as a sighted person you would need to know *who* they were. Someone that might not be familiar might just see an animated pony, so they too would be missing context information.
@talon "Animated pony" kind of is context. At least, that you may be heading in directions either silly, animated, or furry. But we wouldn't bother mentioning that on our instance's alt text. Everyone knows who Twilight is, what her colouring is, what she looks like, and so-on. So it'd be easy to write alt-text that's fine for me and useless for anyone off-instance.
@fastfinge @darius Not to mention that sometimes this can come with significant pushback even without the filter already. I've gotten into many fights because of this already, and this is especially true on places like Discord where sharing images is encouraged and easy. I just really don't have the energy for it, and there will be people who just won't care, no matter what you say. So not engaging with the posts in the first place would be a big relief to me.
In fact, I'd go even a step further. Let me choose how many words have to be in the description for it to be viable. Something like "bird" or "cat" in the image description doesn't help at all, and it might as well just not be there.
In fact, I'd go even a step further. Let me choose how many words have to be in the description for it to be viable. Something like "bird" or "cat" in the image description doesn't help at all, and it might as well just not be there.
@fastfinge @darius honestly? I say yes. Enable it by default. I'm cheeky like that and would feel good about it.
@talon @darius I think filtering for things like triggers is a pretty different prospect. It's filtering someone else out because of what they're actively posting. This is filtering someone out because of something they're not doing. And the end result will be more and more people not doing the thing. Filtering a trigger has no effect on how many folks post something triggering.