2718
Comments (234)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
3
BroRuins 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes, the interpreter is taking up an obnoxious amount of space on the screen. I agree with you on that. An interpreter should be out of the way of the content and ideally un-interactable, being in the middle of the screen goes against what they teach interpreters, but that's not the interpreter's choice.

Other than that I don't think anyone understands the connection you're trying to make with summary/watching.

2
Master_Wyatt_Gurp 2 points ago +2 / -0

Isn't it obvious? You are describing the emotions being passed via sign language. My point is so what, most people read summaries and therefore do not ever get the emotional content, as it were.

So therefore the argument is specious, trite or otherwise given too much importance when a simple closed captioning can achieve the same thing through bold, italics and simply properly typed out captioning.

Don't tell me you can't get emotion from novels when you read text. That's a fallacious argument.

1
bananaguard62 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think he's simply saying it's much better to see it signed, not that it's necessary for every Biden speech.

-19
IG_Farben -19 points ago +1 / -20

Who started this Sign Language Pander Bull Shit ? We can't advance as a society if we cater to the >1%

1
BroRuins 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't understand why you're so aggressive with your typing. It doesn't look like you're trying to discuss this at all, you're set in your ways and you want to get your point out there.

You did it. You can tell people you're right and I'm wrong if you'd like.