3 ms·

> And by “topic”, in the case of HN, I mean the title of an article. The thing is, the topic of the actual article is generally more interesting than the topic

> And by “topic”, in the case of HN, I mean the title of an article. The thing is, the topic of the actual article is generally more interesting than the topic suggested by a naive reading of the title (as is the case here). People discussing things based on titles leads to generic discussions that recur again and again and go nowhere. Whereas the actual topic of the article's content is rather more specific and could lead to an actual new and more specific discussion that might actually go somewhere.

jader201 5y ago
Possibly, but I would bet that many people are upvoting these articles based off a combination of the title + the discussions of the title, which would suggest enough people find those two things interesting (which is why it’s at #1 and why most of the comments are around the title vs. the subject). Also, if the subject is more interesting than the title, then authors should consider being more thoughtful around a title that fits the subject, vs. making sure people click the article.
- Sniffnoy 5y ago
  > Also, if the subject is more interesting than the title, then authors should consider being more thoughtful around a title that fits the subject, vs. making sure people click the article. The problem with this is that, frequently -- as is the case here I'd say -- there is no easy way to properly pin down the actual topic in the space of a reasonable title. The title will necessarily be more broad than the actual topic; if you in general take titles as wholly delineating the topic, rather than suggesting the general space they're in, you're making a mistake. Sticking only to those topics that can be wholly expressed in the space of a brief title is a big limitation on topics; as I said above, taking titles as topics just leads to the same discussions over and over.
- tetsusaiga 5y ago
  I absolutely understand where you're coming from here, but in practice and reality, the point of the title really is to make sure people click the article.

jader201 5y ago

Possibly, but I would bet that many people are upvoting these articles based off a combination of the title + the discussions of the title, which would suggest enough people find those two things interesting (which is why it’s at #1 and why most of the comments are around the title vs. the subject). Also, if the subject is more interesting than the title, then authors should consider being more thoughtful around a title that fits the subject, vs. making sure people click the article.

Sniffnoy 5y ago
> Also, if the subject is more interesting than the title, then authors should consider being more thoughtful around a title that fits the subject, vs. making sure people click the article. The problem with this is that, frequently -- as is the case here I'd say -- there is no easy way to properly pin down the actual topic in the space of a reasonable title. The title will necessarily be more broad than the actual topic; if you in general take titles as wholly delineating the topic, rather than suggesting the general space they're in, you're making a mistake. Sticking only to those topics that can be wholly expressed in the space of a brief title is a big limitation on topics; as I said above, taking titles as topics just leads to the same discussions over and over.
tetsusaiga 5y ago
I absolutely understand where you're coming from here, but in practice and reality, the point of the title really is to make sure people click the article.