• Wren@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I can agree everyone should get to enjoy equal access to the web and still believe censoring user names is nice. There’s gotta be a balance between accessibility and preventing harassment.

    Have you asked OP to link the comment in the post text?

    How about a transcript for the image? That way user names could stay blocked.

    • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      43 minutes ago

      Have you asked OP to link the comment in the post text?

      Yes: that would certainly reveal the names.

      There’s gotta be a balance between accessibility and preventing harassment.

      Easy: don’t harass. There are better controls on harassment by others than breaking accessibility & all the other considerations (usability, web connectivity, authenticity, searchability, fault tolerance) like reporting abuses.

      Transcripts still break web connectivity (to explore context) & authenticity.

      Your approach requests OP conduct/sustain definite harm[1] to speculatively prevent indefinite harm someone else won’t necessarily perform. How is requesting definite harm to an uninvolved party nice or right?

      Everyone has moral agency to do the right thing here, and respecting that would be just.


      1. impairing access ↩︎

      • Wren@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 minutes ago

        If your goal is accessibility, you’re taking quite a long walk to get there.