[dang]

That title is linkbait and therefore the submitter was correct to change it, according to the guideline: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

They did an unusually tasteful job of finding a representative phrase from the article to serve as a better title. Well done!

Edit: oops - it was a mod that edited the title. But I didn't know that when I wrote the above :)

[vultour]

I don't see how the current title is any less linkbait, in fact the original would have never made me want to check it out.

[dang]

For me the difference is that "The key to becoming extraordinary" is just a garden-variety self-help blog title, whereas the Eno phrase is uncommon and thought-provoking.

[bmacho]

Very true.

Clear, true title > mysterious title. In general, but according to the HN clickbait title rules as well.

[dang]

Mysterious titles aren't necessary linkbait. Not everything should explain itself right away—that follows from the principle of curiosity—and we've always taken the position that it's good for readers to have to work a little.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

[bmacho]

Mysterious titles are linkbait from the user perspective.

> Mysterious titles aren't necessary linkbait. Not everything should explain itself right away—that follows from the principle of curiosity—and we've always taken the position that it's good for readers to have to work a little.

The HN guideline speaks against 'linkbait':

    Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.

While it does not specify what 'linkbait' means, I believe the HN guideline wants links to be informative about their content. What else?

[dang]

I think of linkbait as attention-grabbing mechanisms that take advantage of people's reflexes, cognitive biases, tendencies to get riled up, and so on.