3 ms·

and they changed my title not just the link was new from open web advocacy, I also posted actually a piece to try to have a more focused and deep conversation

and they changed my title not just the link was new from open web advocacy, I also posted actually a piece to try to have a more focused and deep conversation so they changed my original title that was actually funny and to the point, marked as duplicate and so the writer of the article from open web advocacy and my article-like comment was shadow banned, thanks!

firtoz 3y ago
The title does need to match the one within the website
- szasamasa 3y ago
  apparently my former title was too much for this site: "iPissed: Apple is after web capabilities to protect close-to-100B App Store Tax" which was relating to the article (and you can read the title of the original article after clicking) but I did not like "kills web apps" because it is not true in my opinion, tries to kill web apps or fights against them or cripples them in the next iOS release... it sounded too eternal and I think Apple will be forced by DMA to do the opposite I really am curiouos why and who did my creativity bother?
  - nickthegreek 3y ago
    Your creativity is against the rules. You must submit with original title if it fits the character length.
  - szasamasa 3y ago
    I found guidelines not rules: "Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." For me, "kill web apps" is misleading since we have to wait and see how the EU reacts. The original title is more of a clickbait. I am not a power user of hacker news. I found a title to fill in and did my best. Had I seen there a link to the guidelines or a text like: please use original title if possible, I would have done it. It is actually 1 minute "site engineering" to mention this on the submission page.
    - firtoz 3y ago
      It's alright, you know now for your next submission. Regarding the dupe removal: I am slightly inclined towards your side, because it's not really a dupe, but, still I understand where the mods are coming from, especially if a good amount of discussion already happened around the same topic recently.
      - szasamasa 3y ago
        yeah it was re-duped so... it was halfway duplicated actually next submission will be just the article title :) I found my peace with it (and read the guidelines) I think I was a little bit also paranoid... but others reacted actually first and I thought I was some kind of a victim which was not true at all so peace! :)
    - dang 3y ago
      (I'm a moderator here.) The title you submitted ("iPissed: Apple is after web capabilities to protect close to 100B App Store Tax") broke that guideline badly. It's standard moderation practice to revert titles when submitters do this. If you felt the original title was misleading, then it would have been correct to change it, but definitely not by editorializing and making it more baity. On HN, being the submitter of an article doesn't confer any special rights over the title—I know other forums work differently, but this is an important point to understand about this one. It's also standard moderation practice to downweight follow-up stories when a major ongoing topic has already had significant discussion recently, as this one has. We can argue about whether or not the story should have been formally marked a [dupe], but the basic moderation call to downweight it as a follow-up thread was, again, the standard one. Otherwise HN's front page would routinely be filled with follow-up discussions of the same few topics—whichever ones are most controversial that week—and that is not the site we're trying to have here. It's not a problem, of course, that you were inexperienced with how HN works and broke the rules by accident. HN can be a cryptic place and it can take a while to get oriented. What's not fine, though, is posting indignant comments complaining about how you've been mistreated by what is in fact ordinary practice. Such meta drama is off-topic in the threads and has a way of taking over discussion if allowed to, so please don't do it again. Also, while I have you: please don't attack other users as you did here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39410740 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39410740. That's definitely not allowed, as should be clear from reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, and you can make your substantive points without it. You're welcome on HN! Just please make sure not to post in the flamewar style to HN threads. Again, I know other forums work differently, but we're trying for thoughtful, curious conversation here, and flamewar destroys that, so that's the most important thing to avoid while commenting.
  - debugnik 3y ago
    Because if you click down there where it says Guidelines you'll see that your title went against them. > Please don't do things to make titles stand out [...] > [...] please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. Also: > my original title that was actually funny and to the point Clearly HN is not the audience for your humour, and "iPissed" isn't "to the point".

firtoz 3y ago

The title does need to match the one within the website

szasamasa 3y ago
apparently my former title was too much for this site: "iPissed: Apple is after web capabilities to protect close-to-100B App Store Tax" which was relating to the article (and you can read the title of the original article after clicking) but I did not like "kills web apps" because it is not true in my opinion, tries to kill web apps or fights against them or cripples them in the next iOS release... it sounded too eternal and I think Apple will be forced by DMA to do the opposite I really am curiouos why and who did my creativity bother?
- nickthegreek 3y ago
  Your creativity is against the rules. You must submit with original title if it fits the character length.
- szasamasa 3y ago
  I found guidelines not rules: "Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." For me, "kill web apps" is misleading since we have to wait and see how the EU reacts. The original title is more of a clickbait. I am not a power user of hacker news. I found a title to fill in and did my best. Had I seen there a link to the guidelines or a text like: please use original title if possible, I would have done it. It is actually 1 minute "site engineering" to mention this on the submission page.
  - firtoz 3y ago
    It's alright, you know now for your next submission. Regarding the dupe removal: I am slightly inclined towards your side, because it's not really a dupe, but, still I understand where the mods are coming from, especially if a good amount of discussion already happened around the same topic recently.
    - szasamasa 3y ago
      yeah it was re-duped so... it was halfway duplicated actually next submission will be just the article title :) I found my peace with it (and read the guidelines) I think I was a little bit also paranoid... but others reacted actually first and I thought I was some kind of a victim which was not true at all so peace! :)
  - dang 3y ago
    (I'm a moderator here.) The title you submitted ("iPissed: Apple is after web capabilities to protect close to 100B App Store Tax") broke that guideline badly. It's standard moderation practice to revert titles when submitters do this. If you felt the original title was misleading, then it would have been correct to change it, but definitely not by editorializing and making it more baity. On HN, being the submitter of an article doesn't confer any special rights over the title—I know other forums work differently, but this is an important point to understand about this one. It's also standard moderation practice to downweight follow-up stories when a major ongoing topic has already had significant discussion recently, as this one has. We can argue about whether or not the story should have been formally marked a [dupe], but the basic moderation call to downweight it as a follow-up thread was, again, the standard one. Otherwise HN's front page would routinely be filled with follow-up discussions of the same few topics—whichever ones are most controversial that week—and that is not the site we're trying to have here. It's not a problem, of course, that you were inexperienced with how HN works and broke the rules by accident. HN can be a cryptic place and it can take a while to get oriented. What's not fine, though, is posting indignant comments complaining about how you've been mistreated by what is in fact ordinary practice. Such meta drama is off-topic in the threads and has a way of taking over discussion if allowed to, so please don't do it again. Also, while I have you: please don't attack other users as you did here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39410740 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39410740. That's definitely not allowed, as should be clear from reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, and you can make your substantive points without it. You're welcome on HN! Just please make sure not to post in the flamewar style to HN threads. Again, I know other forums work differently, but we're trying for thoughtful, curious conversation here, and flamewar destroys that, so that's the most important thing to avoid while commenting.
- debugnik 3y ago
  Because if you click down there where it says Guidelines you'll see that your title went against them. > Please don't do things to make titles stand out [...] > [...] please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. Also: > my original title that was actually funny and to the point Clearly HN is not the audience for your humour, and "iPissed" isn't "to the point".