|
|
|
|
|
by RivieraKid
2360 days ago
|
|
Yes, this is a real problem, verbatim titles are often far from the "optimal" title. In some cases the original title provides almost no information about the content. The question is what's better than a strict "no editorialization" rule. |
|
For a contrived example of how dated the guideline seems, what if somebody submitted a tweet thread criticizing Twitter the company with a headline/sitebit like "Twitter now banning third-party clients. (twitter.com)". Would it have to be renamed to "Now banning third-party clients. (twitter.com)"? That would make it appear to be a more official statement instead of an unsponsored opinion.
I'm picking on Twitter out of recent memory of this submission of mine a couple weeks ago, where the submission title "Tracking down the true origin of a font used in many games and shareware titles" was 100% my own editorializing for lack of title-worthy material in the linked tweet itself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21667238