Is it? Its a pretty common forum comment, saying that they have no interest or capability to watch or listen to a video, and would rather the info was written down so they could read it.
This is a normal request from digg, from reddit, here on lemmy, all over niche hobby forums…
Text based website users usually want text based content. Not really weird.
If people click on a video link, the discussion is typically about the video. Coming into the discussion about the video saying you’re refusing to watch the video is not productive in my mind. People who want to engage in the content of the video typically wish to have a productive conversation.
For people who wish to be text only, I respect that, and I understand that, that’s why I provided the previous parent a link to the transcript that is also available on the YouTube video.
But, again, not a video? You click on the post link, which opens the post and comments. The title says nothing about video either. I didnt know it was a video until after opening the post.
People who are using a text site, who want to engage with your posts title’s implied topic of discussion, are just a bit expecting the text site to have more text to read.
Kinda hard to engage with a video you cant watch, when the post implied a topic of discussion you wanted to read about, no?
I dunno man youre just acting real shocked and surprised that the people at the chinese restaurant expected noodles and rice, and are giving you side eyes for offering them street tacos. Im not saying the tacos arent good tacos.
Is it? Its a pretty common forum comment, saying that they have no interest or capability to watch or listen to a video, and would rather the info was written down so they could read it.
This is a normal request from digg, from reddit, here on lemmy, all over niche hobby forums…
Text based website users usually want text based content. Not really weird.
Our experiences differ
You tend to find text based site users wish they werent?
If people click on a video link, the discussion is typically about the video. Coming into the discussion about the video saying you’re refusing to watch the video is not productive in my mind. People who want to engage in the content of the video typically wish to have a productive conversation.
For people who wish to be text only, I respect that, and I understand that, that’s why I provided the previous parent a link to the transcript that is also available on the YouTube video.
But, again, not a video? You click on the post link, which opens the post and comments. The title says nothing about video either. I didnt know it was a video until after opening the post.
People who are using a text site, who want to engage with your posts title’s implied topic of discussion, are just a bit expecting the text site to have more text to read.
Kinda hard to engage with a video you cant watch, when the post implied a topic of discussion you wanted to read about, no?
I dunno man youre just acting real shocked and surprised that the people at the chinese restaurant expected noodles and rice, and are giving you side eyes for offering them street tacos. Im not saying the tacos arent good tacos.
I see the issue, I’m using the Voyager app, it’s very clear it’s a video before I open the post.
I guess if different apps don’t make that clear, there would be a point of contention. Fair enough thank you for bringing that up
I provided a link to the transcript of the video, you can engage with that textually and join the discussion.