First question: At which resolution does a person/a creature/a character/an avatar/a static dummy/etc. have to be displayed for the hashtag and the #ContentWarning to be valid/necessary?
When the face is discernible and distinguishable from, say, the hair by the colour of the pixels, even though all facial features are still blurred out?
When at least one eye is discernible at sub-pixel level?
When at least one eye is actually visible because it takes up most of at least one pixel?
When it can clearly be identified as an eye in a face/on a head without the context of the surrounding pixels?
Or when the pupil becomes discernible in at least one eye?
Second question: Let's assume a person/a creature/a character/an avatar/a static dummy/etc. is too small in the picture to actually require the hashtag and the content warning just from the visuals. Let's assume I'm someone who writes extremely detailed #ImageDescriptions which I am. Now I describe that person/creature/character/avatar/static dummy, no matter how small and far away, and I mention that the person/creature/character/avatar/static dummy is at least roughly oriented towards the on-looker, thus theoretically being able to look at the on-looker.
Are the hashtag and the content warning required because my description makes clear what those few pixels are? Or are they required because the description amounts to "written eye contact", i.e. would they theoretically even be required without the image?
I'm asking because I actually got confirmation that an #alcohol #CW is necessary when my #ImageDescription reveals a tiny four-pixel speck to be a virtual 3-D model of a strawberry cocktail.
A good question, but there is no one answer to it.
Every autistic is different.
For example, I'm fine with seeing eyes if the person is not in front of me, like in photos and videos. In addition, since I started wearing eyeglasses, it is also easier for me.
However, there are autistics who cannot take it even if it's a photo.
As for CWs, that will depend on which instance you are on. If you will worry about the rules of other instances, it's going to be headache.
Or, if you will worry about what is acceptable for one community, like the autistic community, you'll never find a “one rule fits all”.
@jupiter_rowland Yep. There's no way possible way to please everyone.
Either you just follow your own instance's rule or apply the maximum, so you can cover every possible requests.
For example, for us autistics, it will be very close to impossible to cover everything. Think of a music board. Each dial and switches is an autistic trait and quirk. Each autistic have different “settings” for each of those dials and switches. And we do not have any data how many autistics are, for example, sensitive to eyes. And even if we say there are 100,000, there is no data how many of those are sensitive with eyes from photos.
So, if you really want to have some form of personal CW rule or alt description, you will have to go for the maximum, assume the person looking at it has the highest sensitivity on seeing eyes.
Which of course means you'll probably make it weird for the other communities (and for yourself actually).
> There might be autistic people in the Fediverse who already feel uneasy when a "person" …
There are. ^_^
> … They may end up in the federated or even local timelines of all kinds of instances.
That's right. It's impossible to cater to them all.
For example, in your OP, you had do this: person/a creature/a character/an avatar/a static dummy/etc. and how I describe that person/creature/character/avatar/static dummy, no matter how small and far away, and I mention that the person/creature/character/avatar/static dummy is
It is actually very challenging to read. And as an autistic myself, it is very distracting from what you are trying to say, I actually would've skipped your post if I did not see “autistic” and “eye contact” in your original post.
I am not saying all autistics are finding it challenging to read. There are those who are fine with it. And of course, there are ADHD persons, and AuDHD (Autistic + ADHD).
The thought and effort is more than enough. But, at some point, you'll have to draw a line.
I'll end it with another example since we're already on the topic. You haven't asked yet if you should use “autistic [person]” or “person with autism”. It's a very heated subject.
You know… there is something peculiar with your intent focus and interest on getting this right and satisfying everyone. ;)
@♾️ Yuki (스노 雪亮) 🐬 🦣 Well, I can't go by what only one community finds acceptable. I've got followers from all over the place, and I don't see when someone boosts my posts. They may end up in the federated or even local timelines of all kinds of instances. Technically speaking, I have to follow the rules of all these instances.
And then there's what individuals feel. There might be autistic people in the Fediverse who already feel uneasy when a "person" measures fewer than two dozen pixels in a very busy, very detailed image with all kinds of big and small things in it, but the face of that "person" is halfway discernable, so it means that "person" must be looking in their general direction.
Maybe there are even those who feel uneasy about a "person" that's only 4 pixels in an 800-pixel-wide image, but my description says that "person" is not oriented away from the camera, and the top pixel has a tendency of being flesh-coloured.
That's the point I'm trying to explain. You're going to end up with a very long post to cover every possible scenario to the point that your post won't be readable or comprehensible anymore. ^_^
> Re: eyes
Believe it or not, there are. As I've mentioned earlier, those are fine with me, especially since I am wearing eyeglasses and I've learned ways to avoid eye contact. However, that's just me, each autistic person is unique.
> I think the correct term should be "person in the autistic spectrum".
It depends on who you ask.
Based on my own observation over this debate, it is usually parents and non-autistics who prefer “person with autism”. While the “person with autism” they call mostly (not all) prefers “autistic person” or “autistics”.
As for “person in the autistic spectrum”, that's new. This is the first I've heard of it and it appears to me as an attempt to combine “person with autism” and “autistic person” and “autism spectrum disorder” into one. And… surprise… there are “persons with autism” and “autistic persons” who also do not like “in the ‘autism/autistic’ spectrum” because it sounds like the person was placed inside a certain box, you know, “in the” or “inside the spectrum”.
Going back, from autism alone, you will probably end up with a very long alt-text, description, or posts, just to cover everything. So, my take on this, your own instance rules and keep it simple.
I use “autistic” and “autistic person”, if someone from the “person with autism” camp doesn't like it, I don't care.
Or, for example, someone tells me to CW my political/elections posts, I don't care either. My instance doesn't have draconic rules, and in my country, in our culture, we have zero issues about political/election related posts. In fact, we prefer to see it so we can make informed decisions.
Somewhere, you will have to draw the line. ^_^
Anyway, going back to the eyes… if you really want to cover all bases, then the best course of action is to cover the eyes. So if your post gets reshared… there's no risk of offending someone, or putting someone in an uncomfortable situation.
@♾️ Yuki (스노 雪亮) 🐬 🦣 "For example, in your OP, you had do this: person/a creature/a character/an avatar/a static dummy/etc. and how I describe that person/creature/character/avatar/static dummy, no matter how small and far away, and I mention that the person/creature/character/avatar/static dummy is" That's because I had to cover a lot, including but not limited to:
real-life humans
real-life animals
drawn/animated human characters
drawn/animated furry characters
drawn/animated animal characters
drawn/animated feral animals
video game characters
avatars in virtual worlds (may appear in my pictures)
computer-controlled non-player characters in virtual worlds based on OpenSimulator (may appear in my pictures)
computer-controlled animesh figures in Second Life or virtual worlds based on OpenSimulator (may appear in my pictures)
static, non-moving dummy figures in virtual worlds (may appear in my pictures)
two-dimensional, semi-transparent, "cardboard-style", static, non-moving dummy props based on photographs or screenshots or drawings of humans or furry characters or animals (may appear in my pictures)
"> There might be autistic people in the Fediverse who already feel uneasy when a "person" …
There are. ^_^" Okay, just for me to understand this: I will now confront you with links to a few pictures which I'd flag "CW: eye contact" whereas other people wouldn't even know where there's someone who'd make eye contact.
Example #1: this image from this blog post (this link leads to actual, fairly close-up eye contact).
If I understand you correctly, both the female avatar at roughly 20% from the left-hand edge and 60% from the top edge, the two static guard dummies on both sides of the entrance to the building, the horse beneath the trees and the rocks, to the left of the building, the prized cow way off to the right of the entrance (its left eye is not covered) and the head sculpture inside the building can be triggers that need to be hidden.
Example #2: this image from this blog post (this link leads to more close-up eye contact than the example).
On the path that leads through the image, fairly close to the edge to the left, there's a cart with what looks like an static dummy ox in front. There's a human static dummy standing behind the neck of the ox. The on-looker is well within the field of view of the ox, and the human is oriented such that his face is largely on the visible side of his head. In both cases, it can only be estimated where the eyes are. Still, if I understand you correctly, both the human and the ox can be critical triggers.
Example #3: this image from this blog post (don't scroll beyond this image once you've found it).
Even disregarding the huge posters above the stage, every avatar or occasional NPC dance partner in this animated image can be a trigger for showing their face unless they permanently turn their back and the back of their head towards the on-looker.
"I'll end it with another example since we're already on the topic. You haven't asked yet if you should use “autistic [person]” or “person with autism”. It's a very heated subject." I think the correct term should be "person in the autistic spectrum".
But I keep forgetting stuff. I can write a monstrous image description, redact it, add a missing transcription which I had previously practically apologised for not having been able to write, end up posting a 13,000-character behemoth and then realise I've forgotten to mention that it's a digital rendering and to describe what that "Metropolis robot Maria" look-alike actually looks like.