Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

hackernewstitles.netlify.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#31

Post by dang »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #28
onionisafruit wrote: post #12

It looks like the mods are sticklers for capitalization. I’m looking forward to seeing this post’s title edited.

One could add "(2019)" to the end of it. Perhaps a bothersome aspect of title changes is we are not told the reason(s) behind the edits. For example, if an HN reader is emailing the moderator and asking them to change a title, other readers might want to know that, along with knowing what was the original title. Whereas if it is a small correction, like adding "(2019)" to the end, perhaps few readers would really car…

The guideline also includes when titles should be changed: "Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Editorializing is when the submitter uses the title to express the submitter's own point of view about what's important in the article or the story. When we change a title, we're scrupulous about not doing that. We always look for an accurate, neutral title using representative language from the article itself (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...).

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#32

Post by krapp »

dang wrote: post #22
g42gregory wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we know who is doing these edits and why?

It could be the submitter, the software, or the mods. For example, the submitter did this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29879165 but the mods did this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29879184 Peter's tool doesn't tend to pick up software edits because most of those happen on submission, which is before the tool picks them up.

Since you seem to be logging edit history internally, how about making that visible to users? There would be a lot less confusion and paranoia around if it were obvious when an edit was made and by whom.

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#33

Post by jrochkind1 »

dang wrote: post #18
hammock wrote: post #15

Why doesn't HN have an auto-title suggester that si ply pulls in the title of the target URL? Would save a lot of heartache.

There's no "the title" - there are lots of choices, including the HTML doc title, the URL itself (which sometimes-has-a-hyphenated-title-like-this), headings on the page. None is reliably the best choice, and all of them are frequently crap; frequently enough that it wouldn't make sense to have any of them be an official suggestion.

And yet the guidelines suggest you use "the original title":

> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.

I don't think that ends up being confusing even though "the original title" could mean HTML element or biggest heading on the page, it works out, we know what you mean. (I think it's usually the biggest visible heading on the page, rather than mostly invisible HTML title element).

Since the guidelines literally do say to usually, if there isn't a reason not to, use, or at least start with, the original title... I agree it would be helpful if the submit form had an option to pre-fill the "title" field with the original title scraped from the article, like reddit does. You can always edit it before submission, it's just a pre-filled convenience. Which is how reddit UI works.

I think this would be a convenience to those following the guidelines (which totally tell you to start with the original title!), plus perhaps increase compliance with the guidelines by making it the path of least resistance.

On the other hand, it may reasonably not be the highest priority for development, I know you have a backlog. But I don't follow the argument that it would be counter-productive or impossible.

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#34

Post by pvg »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #33
dang wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no "the title" - there are lots of choices, including the HTML doc title, the URL itself (which sometimes-has-a-hyphenated-title-like-this), headings on the page. None is reliably the best choice, and all of them are frequently crap; frequently enough that it wouldn't make sense to have any of them be an official suggestion.

And yet the guidelines suggest you use "the original title": > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. I don't think that ends up being confusing even though "the original title" could mean HTML element or biggest heading on the page, it works out, we know what you mean. (I think it's usually the biggest visible heading on the page, rather than mostly invisibl…

The bookmarklet fills the title field with the HTML document title.

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#35

Post by [deleted] »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #33
dang wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no "the title" - there are lots of choices, including the HTML doc title, the URL itself (which sometimes-has-a-hyphenated-title-like-this), headings on the page. None is reliably the best choice, and all of them are frequently crap; frequently enough that it wouldn't make sense to have any of them be an official suggestion.

And yet the guidelines suggest you use "the original title": > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. I don't think that ends up being confusing even though "the original title" could mean HTML element or biggest heading on the page, it works out, we know what you mean. (I think it's usually the biggest visible heading on the page, rather than mostly invisibl…

[deleted]

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#36

Post by dang »

krapp wrote: post #32
dang wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be the submitter, the software, or the mods. For example, the submitter did this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29879165 but the mods did this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29879184 Peter's tool doesn't tend to pick up software edits because most of those happen on submission, which is before the tool picks them up.

Since you seem to be logging edit history internally, how about making that visible to users? There would be a lot less confusion and paranoia around if it were obvious when an edit was made and by whom.

Alas, I think the odds are that there would be more, not less. Certainly there would be a lot more fodder for it. These things don't explain themselves, after all; we still have to do that, and it's a ton of work. It's also stressful—it's all public, and if you screw up in any way, you can easily generate more hostility and more work for yourself.

I think the current approach, in which we don't publish everything we do but are happy to answer specific questions when people ask them, is the right balance.

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#37

Post by soneil »

FerdSlav wrote: post #9

Curious how something such as this is actually implemented. Is there a feed that you are subscribing to? Are you consistently polling posts looking for changes? Or is it some third option?

A lot of title changes are apparent in the RSS feed, the new title appears as a new item with the same URL.

I’m not sure how you’d disambiguate merges that way, as they have the same symptom, but the process isn’t invisible.

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#38

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

dang wrote: post #31
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One could add "(2019)" to the end of it. Perhaps a bothersome aspect of title changes is we are not told the reason(s) behind the edits. For example, if an HN reader is emailing the moderator and asking them to change a title, other readers might want to know that, along with knowing what was the original title. Whereas if it is a small correction, like adding "(2019)" to the end, perhaps few readers would really car…

The guideline also includes when titles should be changed: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Editorializing is when the submitter uses the title to express the submitter's own point of view about what's important in the article or the story. When we change a title, we're scrupulous about not doing that. We alw…

Under this definition of "editorialize", instances where someone else besides the submitter uses, i.e., changes, the title to express their own point of view about what's important in the article or the story are not examples of editorializing.

Why not let people make up their own minds. The source of the article or story chooses a title; it is their right to do so. Readers may or may not agree with that choice, and they are free to point out where they believe it may be misleading or "linkbait". What is the harm in allowing readers to draw their own conclusions. By changing the title, that process of review by a variety of readers is prevented. Why not let readers be independent thinkers.

Re: Hacker News Title Edit Tracker

#39

Post by dang »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #38
dang wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guideline also includes when titles should be changed: " Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize. " - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Editorializing is when the submitter uses the title to express the submitter's own point of view about what's important in the article or the story. When we change a title, we're scrupulous about not doing that. We alw…

Under this definition of "editorialize", instances where someone else besides the submitter uses, i.e., changes, the title to express their own point of view about what's important in the article or the story are not examples of editorializing. Why not let people make up their own minds. The source of the article or story chooses a title; it is their right to do so. Readers may or may not agree with that choice, and…

I don't understand your first paragraph.

The whole point of HN's approach to titles is to let people make up their own minds. The title is by far the most important influence on a thread. Nothing else comes close. Letting submitters rewrite titles to suit their own point of view amounts to conferring the power to control the entire discussion, or at least strongly influence it. On HN, being the person to submit an article does not convey any particular authority over the content.

HN's moderation practice around titles has been well established for over a decade. Accurate, neutral titles, preferably using representative language from the article itself, are probably the single biggest thing that keeps this site the way it is.

Post reply on HN