[KennyBlanken]

> As you've said, we were known, for example, for "intentionally-obscure headlines." Guess what, that works for some people - and it was fun - but it was holding us back reaching many more people, not just from the headline tone but also aggregation and sharing. And I want our original, technical, and best coverage seen by as many folks as possible.

This is like being a curry shop known for having intensely flavorful but spicy curry - thus having dedicated fans who enjoy that flavor - and toning it down in flavor and spice because you want to have more general appeal. Now nobody thinks of you as "that shop with the intense curry" but just one of many curry shops.

Now you're just like every other shitty tech news website and competing for the same generic eyeballs who will read a story from you that happens to appear in google news and never come back.

[noAnswer]

OP literally left despise them having "intense curry".

[donpott]

OP here. I think it's an apt metaphor. To expand/clarify, I would say that the spiciness of the curry was at the same time hard work (ie. having to parse the headlines, for example) and the main reason I went to this restaurant (it made it unique, it was a differentiator). I would visit it occasionally for a treat (or whenever a big event happened in Tech, although I'm mixing my metaphors now), but not as something one does every day.

[jimmaswell]

But it's just the headlines allegedly, not the rest of the writing, at least.