3 ms·
According to https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=blog.twitter.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=blog.twitter.com it's the Twitter blog site, is it n
by sctb 8y ago
According to https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=blog.twitter.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=blog.twitter.com it's the Twitter blog site, is it not? The quotation marks seemed to convey something else, whether you intended them to or not. But since the original title was neither misleading nor click-bait it's besides the point.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ColinWright 8y agoOne can't know that without going to the site and working it out. Exactly that title on Medium, for example, would leave it completely unclear without visiting the article. So unless you know that this is Twitter's official blog - which some people (including me) wouldn't - it's useful to have the modified title. In particular you say: ... since the original title was neither misleading ... To me the title as it stands is misleading. That's why I wanted to make it clearer. <fx: shrug /> But seriously, your call. You thought it was editorialisation, intentional or not, and you changed it. I think the existing title is less useful or informative, but it's not my final decision. I've long felt that the blind reversion of submitted titles to the title of the article is misplaced and over-zealous, but as a moderator on other platforms, I know that every decision requires work, so not actually making a decision is a huge saving in time, effort, energy, and will. (Several edits have been made as I try to make my points clearer. Not sure I've succeeded, but I have no more time.)
- sctb 8y agoAh, I see. Appreciated! I did jump to conclusions here and I apologize.
- ColinWright 8y agoThank you. I'd suggest some middle ground, but it's probably too late.