3 ms·

Can you describe what the current policy on titles is? Are you pro-anodyne?

• dang 11y ago
  I meant "anodyne" not as a good thing but as "the best we can come up with for now", i.e. at least it wouldn't provoke a big argument about linkbait. That's why I asked readers to suggest something better. Nobody did, so maybe it was just hard. What the HN guidelines say about titles has been the same for years: Please use the original title unless it is misleading or linkbait. We deliberately avoid having detailed policies, but in this case we can derive a few corollaries. What we want is the opposite of what we don't want: 1a. A good title is accurate and netural. The reason for preferring the original title is to let the text speak for itself, so: 1b. When changing a title, try to find representative language from the article, rather than making something up. And since one big reason for the guideline is to minimize bikeshed-style complaining about titles: 1c. The best way to comment that a title is bad is to suggest a better one.