This is why I take issue with the way link aggregators handle title rules. The title of a popular article is usually written by someone other than the article's author (by a headline writer instead) in order to provoke more of a response. I think we should make an effort to reflect the content of the article, rather than take the misleading headline.
Whether you take issue or not is irrelevant. It works, or it wouldn't be done. The real world sucks. I mean it's the same reason we are still, in 2018, using JavaScript for large application development. Best just get used to it.
Evidently it does not work for GP. “This is what’s done” is hardly a counterargument to “I think we should change this.” It’s even weaker of a counterargument than “I actually like how it is.”
It wasn't a counterargument. It was merely a statement that one should not underestimate the momentum of an approach that is effective. It works well and is therefore unlikely to change.
Let us hope that through his HN comments ashelmire can fight the tyranny of linkbait titles.
I’m not arguing about whether it works for the people making the headlines. It obviously drives up clicks. But it does not work for places of discussion like this, where you have people arguing with the title and we care about discussion and meaning, not about the number of clicks they get.
