This sounds like a moral lecture from someone who has run out of arguments. As we all know, there are jokes that do not translate well, if at all, into other languages. There is a word joke and also a "picture joke" - even if this term is not familiar. Musicians entertain themselves with funny melodies - which I don't even begin to understand. I would never think of accusing them of excluding me. To accuse someone of excluding others because their messages are not universally transferable is nonsensical and would ultimately lead to an impoverishment of all cultures.

That said, I would like to see alt-text added to images that are difficult to describe. Even at the risk of the joke not being understood.

@Ingo Lantschner Are you seriously suggesting that me calling someone out for equating disability with non-Latin scripts sounds like I'm running out of arguments?

I hope you ran your comment by one of your many visually-impaired friends because otherwise it would sound pretty fucking privileged.

@Hypolite Petovan What I'm saying is that you don't make arguments, but moralise and judge: "your jokes aren't that funny", "your comparisons show bad taste", "your comments sound privileged" are, at least in my understanding, not arguments, but rather speeches of a priest or a governess. I have no problem with priests and governesses - they are honourable professions - but I am surprised to find them in this discussion, and this after you have accused others of having no arguments. Does that really fit together?

But maybe we have a misunderstanding of language or culture here. Because in the end we come to the same conclusion that alt-texts are helpful even for "funny pictures".

Perhaps I should clarify what an argument is in my sense:

just remember that just because a joke loses all its fun to you if it is explained, that does not mean others will all feel the same. We've gotten used to finding descriptions of visual jokes sufficiently amusing;
(copied from the above comment by @Mayana)

And here we see clearly what are the advantaged of an argument: it picks up the discussant, addresses his arguments and enables him to change his point of view. Telling him that his jokes are not funny will not achieve that.

@Ingo Lantschner I do moralize and judge because it is a very moral issue, there's no logical point to make here. When somebody say "Please add image descriptions so that visually-impaired people can also enjoy your funny pictures" and someone is essentially like "Nah", you know there's no logical argument that will get through them, they purposefully chose to publicly exclude disabled people, which is an extremely (im)moral position.

Word to the wise, next time you actually agree with someone, please don't comment on their tone publicly. You don't have to like it, but it won't do anyone any favor to comment on it.

@Hypolite Petovan It's not about tone. Your message and the one I quoted send completely different messages:

Your pictures may be not that funny if you can't describe them

vs.

Please consider describing them anyway, because blind people may have a different perspective than you have.

Even without the "please", the second message would be more substantial, more communicative and less arogant than the first.

It is now up to you to decide how you want to communicate further. For my part, I would like you to refrain from unsolicited "wise advice", for example.

@Ingo Lantschner And now you can go fuck yourself.

You apparently haven’t picking on the subtle hint I wasn’t interested talking about this with you anymore, but this should clear any lingering misunderstanding.

Interesting ... that a person who presents himself as so morally superior is so quick to fly into a rage.

skimping on the second 'h' in Hashtag again? ;) How much latinum to add it back in? ;)

- add your popular #hashtags to your dictionary so you spell them consistently
- and of course, use #CamelCaseHashtags so that screen readers can prounouce them