(no title)
asynchronous | 1 year ago
I wish we could find some solution where we distribute the epileptic-safe versions alongside the unsafe ones and users could choose.
asynchronous | 1 year ago
I wish we could find some solution where we distribute the epileptic-safe versions alongside the unsafe ones and users could choose.
ziddoap|1 year ago
They seem to be able to distribute uncensored & censored versions for some of the more risque or violent shows, as well as various levels of censorship for different regions. So, the solution is sort of already there, there's just not enough motivation I guess.
the_af|1 year ago
How would the users choose though?
"I want to risk an epileptic fit" vs "I don't want to risk one"? And if you do have a fit due to an underlying condition you didn't know about, and you break your back or suffer some injury (as the author narrates having experienced, though not due to Pokemon), would the broadcaster be legally at risk?
It doesn't seem crazy to me to play it safe here...
VincentEvans|1 year ago
I strongly disagree and this kind of take makes me sympathize with the author less than I would otherwise, subconsciously.
I can simultaneously support the idea that we should make adjusted content for people with epilepsy, or in a more general sense - it is a sign of elevated society to strive to accommodate people with disabilities or differences, but at the same time resent the notion that accomplishing the above has to mean that asking for an unaltered experience is “wrong”.
I feel that putting those two demands on the opposite sides of the scale is “wokeism”.
the_af|1 year ago
So playing the edited scene seems like the safest choice for everyone...
homefree|1 year ago
I also just have an allergic reaction to people calling others *ist at this point too, espeically when trying to leverage some policy against them.
asynchronous|1 year ago