4 ms·
Here is a meta-comment that may seem irrelevant but I truly wonder about this odd tick of internet writing. The title should be "Kotlin Sucks" or "Why I think
by gmarx 10y ago
Here is a meta-comment that may seem irrelevant but I truly wonder about this odd tick of internet writing.
The title should be "Kotlin Sucks" or "Why I think Kotlin Sucks". The article doesn't say anything about the circumstances that lead to the sucking (e.g. the main developer suffered a serious brain injury midway through the project) he just lists and details aspects of it that suck.
This incorrect, misleading use of the word "why" in the titles of internet articles is so common I must ask, "why?"
- sctb 10y agoYou've convinced me that "Why" in this title is a form of a clickbait—perhaps to appeal to our craving for causality—so we've removed it. Thanks!
- gmarx 10y agoWow. You're welcome and thanks! I don't know why it should make me feel good that a stranger on the internet took action in response to my comment, but it does
- TelmoMenezes 10y agoMy theory is that it's a mix of two things: - Some guru years ago must have come up with some over-simplistic silver bullet such as: "if you claim to explain why something is the case in the title, everyone will be drawn in by the potential value you provide and the self-confidence you project". Or some shit like that (case in point - list "articles"); - Copying the linguistic mannerisms of some "in-crowd" makes you feel like you belong. This site is full of ticks like that if you pay attention.
- abiox 10y ago> he just lists and details aspects of it that suck it's possession of said aspects aren't why it sucks?