4 ms·

<rant>Cryptic titles seem to be commonplace these days for some reason. If you want me to read your article please take the trouble to spell-out the subject mat

by cutler 6y ago

<rant>Cryptic titles seem to be commonplace these days for some reason. If you want me to read your article please take the trouble to spell-out the subject matter.</rant>

cshift 6y ago
Agreed 100%. It's just dumb. "How this Ends". Uhh... what?
Centigonal 6y ago
You WON'T BELIEVE what I have to say about your rant! ------------------------------------------------------ Regarding this specific... Read More: https://write.as/he5fox6god86m.md https://write.as/he5fox6god86m.md
ncallaway 6y ago
I suspect that they're common, because they create curiosity, which leads to clicks. Those clicks (if the article is good) end up leading to upvotes. So, I suppose the answer is we're in a marketplace that probably prefers cryptic titles
paulcole 6y ago
Are you sure they want you to read their article? Cryptic titles get shared on HN and get clicked. Enough people read them, so do they really care if you read it?
- cutler 6y ago
  Even if you end-up reading the article you do so in a state of annoyance which is usually does not help the author's cause.
  - paulcole 6y ago
    “You” doesn’t equate to everyone.
    - cutler 6y ago
      "You" as in a less formal version of "one".
      - paulcole 6y ago
        Except everyone isn’t annoyed by cryptic titles. More people are (at worst) neutral to them than are put off by them. The reaction of one rando to a cryptic title doesn’t particularly matter. The publication is appealing to their audience (as a whole) not to me (or “you”).
pavon 6y ago
To be fair, most places where you would discover or read these articles show more context than just the title. HN is fairly unique in showing only titles, and having a general policy of not changing the title.
cutler 6y ago
<subrant>What's even worse, and equally common, is no date on the article or if there is a date it's hidden away somewhere near the bottom of the content. These things are just so basic. I think we need to resurrect Jakob Nielson and get him on the speaker circuit again.</subrant>
- gregschlom 6y ago
  The date is right above the title in this case.
  - cutler 6y ago
    I was generalising about what is common in the subrant so maybe it should have read "when there is no date on the article".
- gary_0 6y ago
  On a related note, I've noticed lately that Google has been giving me old results that show up as having recent dates, even though there's no date anywhere on the page (or it was grabbed from a random Disqus comment), and the content is clearly outdated (and often blogspam). I wonder if DuckDuckGo is any better...
chb 6y ago
And yet, here we are.
shakkhar 6y ago
To offer a counterpoint - this is a blog post made by Fred Wilson with the exact same title. Fred has the prerogative to title his posts whichever way he likes, and I would not want some random HN poster to add a subtitle to Fred's title. What is an acceptable title in your opinion? "Fred Wilson who is a famous VC speculates about the state of the economy"?

by cutler 6y ago

<rant>Cryptic titles seem to be commonplace these days for some reason. If you want me to read your article please take the trouble to spell-out the subject matter.</rant>

cshift 6y ago

Agreed 100%. It's just dumb. "How this Ends". Uhh... what?

Centigonal 6y ago

You WON'T BELIEVE what I have to say about your rant! ------------------------------------------------------ Regarding this specific... Read More: https://write.as/he5fox6god86m.md https://write.as/he5fox6god86m.md

ncallaway 6y ago

I suspect that they're common, because they create curiosity, which leads to clicks. Those clicks (if the article is good) end up leading to upvotes. So, I suppose the answer is we're in a marketplace that probably prefers cryptic titles

paulcole 6y ago

Are you sure they want you to read their article? Cryptic titles get shared on HN and get clicked. Enough people read them, so do they really care if you read it?

cutler 6y ago
Even if you end-up reading the article you do so in a state of annoyance which is usually does not help the author's cause.
- paulcole 6y ago
  “You” doesn’t equate to everyone.
  - cutler 6y ago
    "You" as in a less formal version of "one".
    - paulcole 6y ago
      Except everyone isn’t annoyed by cryptic titles. More people are (at worst) neutral to them than are put off by them. The reaction of one rando to a cryptic title doesn’t particularly matter. The publication is appealing to their audience (as a whole) not to me (or “you”).

pavon 6y ago

To be fair, most places where you would discover or read these articles show more context than just the title. HN is fairly unique in showing only titles, and having a general policy of not changing the title.

cutler 6y ago

<subrant>What's even worse, and equally common, is no date on the article or if there is a date it's hidden away somewhere near the bottom of the content. These things are just so basic. I think we need to resurrect Jakob Nielson and get him on the speaker circuit again.</subrant>

gregschlom 6y ago
The date is right above the title in this case.
- cutler 6y ago
  I was generalising about what is common in the subrant so maybe it should have read "when there is no date on the article".
gary_0 6y ago
On a related note, I've noticed lately that Google has been giving me old results that show up as having recent dates, even though there's no date anywhere on the page (or it was grabbed from a random Disqus comment), and the content is clearly outdated (and often blogspam). I wonder if DuckDuckGo is any better...

chb 6y ago

And yet, here we are.

shakkhar 6y ago

To offer a counterpoint - this is a blog post made by Fred Wilson with the exact same title. Fred has the prerogative to title his posts whichever way he likes, and I would not want some random HN poster to add a subtitle to Fred's title. What is an acceptable title in your opinion? "Fred Wilson who is a famous VC speculates about the state of the economy"?