[huhtenberg]

Jeez, Daniel. You obviously has a strong opinion on this subject and you are simply not listening. What I mentioned is a simple solution to a major (if not the) moderation issue that HN has that will work for everyone. What you are defending is an approach that works for some cases, but fail in many.

  <edit>

For one, by editing a submission title you are effectively putting words in submitter's mouth. That in itself is already an ethically questionable practice. I had a title on my Tell HN post changed and I was absolutely totally pissed by that. If you change a title, then do everyone a favor and put your own name next to it.

For two, I happen to actually care for what particular angle the submitter had in mind when posting a link. This is not a Reuters, this is a discussion place and every discussion has a starting point. You change "Algorithms" to "Nurses", you change the point. You do it halfway through the discussion - congratulations, you just f#cked up the whole discussion. This is what I meant by "ruining". Who the hell cares about eventual consistency of HN archives if one can't readily understand the context of what's actually people are talking about now.

  </edit>

Try this - say, HN adds an option of keeping the original title. Let's further assume this is not a default. Can you please explain how did you arrive at "It would change HN dramatically, and almost certainly disastrously"?

[MaulingMonkey]

> For one, by editing a submission title you are effectively putting words in submitter's mouth.

If that's the case, isn't editorializing the title putting words in the mouth of the article writer?

[huhtenberg]

No, of course not.