[fl0wenol]

Meta-comment:

I am so over titles of the form "* considered harmful" when it has something to do with someone's opinion and IT/computing.

Please just stop.

[elnate]

And -gate over trivialities.

[smtucker]

I like to call this "gategate"

[krazydad]

Considered harmful... by this one person.

[cwyers]

http://meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html

[calvins]

"Considered harmful" considered harmful ;-)

[sliverstorm]

But how will you get clicks if you don't resort to ever-more-Buzzfeed-esque titles?

[geekrax]

Yeah, right? He should've just said "13 reasons why I will never use StackOverflow again."

[smoyer]

I made the mistake of clicking one of those "13 reason ..." links the other day. Each of the thirteen reasons was split into 4 parts, so I had to navigate through 52 pages to read the entire article. I quit when I realized what they'd done (5th section).

I'm not going to waste my time ... especially when your site is ad-laden and slow. The funny part is that this is probably a consequence of Adwords not allowing asynchronous ad updates on a page. They needed me to navigate through 52 pages to increase their impression counts.

Very sad ... and now back to my regularly scheduled uBlock.

[ericcumbee]

better yet "I Tried to delete my StackOverFlow account. You won't believe what happened next"

[etjossem]

You'll never believe number 10!

[cratermoon]

Software Developers HATE This!

[jjoonathan]

13 reasons why StackOverflow is considered harmful?

[SapphireSun]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline... Seems applicable here given the interrogative mark.