3 ms·

Why was the title of this changed? It may have been editorialized but it wasn't misleading or clickbait by any means.

by dandandan 10y ago

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
cortesoft 10y ago
'worst legacy publisher' is not exactly a neutral fact.
- mindcrime 10y ago
  But the HN guidelines say "No editorializing". We aren't allowed to "fix" blatantly bad headlines, so it's pretty hypocritical of the powers that be to "sanitize" this one (if that's what happened).
  - Cogito 10y ago
    I think the sanitisation of the headline is in keeping with the spirit of the following guidelines: If the original title begins with a number or number + gratuitous adjective, we'd appreciate it if you'd crop it. E.g. translate "10 Ways To Do X" to "How To Do X," and "14 Amazing Ys" to "Ys." Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. "The 5 Platonic Solids." Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. Furthermore, the full title as displayed on the article "SSRN sold to Elsevier: From open access to the worst legacy publisher" is actually a main title and subtitle, as noted by the colon separating them. It's quite common on HN for the subtitle to not be included in the submission's title, or for it to be used instead of the main title.
    - mindcrime 10y ago
      I think the sanitisation of the headline is in keeping with the spirit of the following guidelines: Yep, it's just not consistent with the actual observed practices here. In reality, if a submitter "fixes" a bad headline, it almost always gets reverted to the exact title of the original post, no more, no less. But on this occasion, somebody submitted the exact original headline, and it got "sanitized" for no apparent reason. The frustrating part isn't the guideline, it's the inconsistent application of the guideline.
      - Cogito 10y ago
        I should have changed my post to reflect that I think my second argument is the stronger. The subtitle was removed, and I have seen this as common practice (choosing either main or subtitle) in the past - though typically by the submitter. My first point is more that this does not fly in the face of the guidelines, even if it is not common practice.
      - Lewton 10y ago
        The reversion to the original headline happens automatically. There's no inconsistency, it's just that only mods are allowed to change the headline
lovich 10y ago
That's the second title Ibe seen get sanitized in the past few days and I have only skimmed hacker news in that time
jsmthrowaway 10y ago
Actually, it wasn't editorialized at all and was submitted exactly verbatim. I saw the full title on HN minutes after it was submitted, which for some reason now has been chopped. Guessing not by the submitter, because it also happened on the Apple "assassins" headline from someone else around the same time (submitted full, edited down). Nobody has noticed in that thread yet. Both edits alter the tone. The other one is altered dramatically, this one less so. I can recall dozens of instances of this happening, for what it's worth. It's just another one of those HN guidelines to shrug about and struggle to explain, and enough people have asked for transparency on this over the years that you'll probably never see it.
brudgers 10y ago
In my experience, titles that are seen as clickbait or overly editorial are often edited. I suspect that the first order problem is seen as clickbait/editorializing and verbatim use a lesser given the relevance of titles to the HN front page.

Why was the title of this changed? It may have been editorialized but it wasn't misleading or clickbait by any means.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

cortesoft 10y ago

'worst legacy publisher' is not exactly a neutral fact.

mindcrime 10y ago
But the HN guidelines say "No editorializing". We aren't allowed to "fix" blatantly bad headlines, so it's pretty hypocritical of the powers that be to "sanitize" this one (if that's what happened).
- Cogito 10y ago
  I think the sanitisation of the headline is in keeping with the spirit of the following guidelines: If the original title begins with a number or number + gratuitous adjective, we'd appreciate it if you'd crop it. E.g. translate "10 Ways To Do X" to "How To Do X," and "14 Amazing Ys" to "Ys." Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. "The 5 Platonic Solids." Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. Furthermore, the full title as displayed on the article "SSRN sold to Elsevier: From open access to the worst legacy publisher" is actually a main title and subtitle, as noted by the colon separating them. It's quite common on HN for the subtitle to not be included in the submission's title, or for it to be used instead of the main title.
  - mindcrime 10y ago
    I think the sanitisation of the headline is in keeping with the spirit of the following guidelines: Yep, it's just not consistent with the actual observed practices here. In reality, if a submitter "fixes" a bad headline, it almost always gets reverted to the exact title of the original post, no more, no less. But on this occasion, somebody submitted the exact original headline, and it got "sanitized" for no apparent reason. The frustrating part isn't the guideline, it's the inconsistent application of the guideline.
    - Cogito 10y ago
      I should have changed my post to reflect that I think my second argument is the stronger. The subtitle was removed, and I have seen this as common practice (choosing either main or subtitle) in the past - though typically by the submitter. My first point is more that this does not fly in the face of the guidelines, even if it is not common practice.
    - Lewton 10y ago
      The reversion to the original headline happens automatically. There's no inconsistency, it's just that only mods are allowed to change the headline

lovich 10y ago

That's the second title Ibe seen get sanitized in the past few days and I have only skimmed hacker news in that time

jsmthrowaway 10y ago

Actually, it wasn't editorialized at all and was submitted exactly verbatim. I saw the full title on HN minutes after it was submitted, which for some reason now has been chopped. Guessing not by the submitter, because it also happened on the Apple "assassins" headline from someone else around the same time (submitted full, edited down). Nobody has noticed in that thread yet. Both edits alter the tone. The other one is altered dramatically, this one less so. I can recall dozens of instances of this happening, for what it's worth. It's just another one of those HN guidelines to shrug about and struggle to explain, and enough people have asked for transparency on this over the years that you'll probably never see it.

brudgers 10y ago

In my experience, titles that are seen as clickbait or overly editorial are often edited. I suspect that the first order problem is seen as clickbait/editorializing and verbatim use a lesser given the relevance of titles to the HN front page.