Timeline for Appropriate to edit the title after answers point out what the actual problem is?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 5, 2015 at 16:11 | comment | added | killermist | My problem regards hazard of using users that tend to be problematic on SU. Some users are violently sensitive to specific words. Some words trigger some users to (opinion-based) cast close votes. "Why" is not a loaded term. For it to trigger "too broad" votes as a knee-jerk, is wrong (against those users). The title is, and should be a question. The body lays out the details. Wrong-acting users should be repudiated. | |
| Mar 1, 2015 at 21:23 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @killermist - I don't disagree with you. My point was more about the hazard of using words that tend to be problematic on SU. Some users are very sensitive to off-topic "flag" words. Superlatives (best, fastest, etc.), trigger opinion-based close votes. "Why" seems to often trigger "too broad" votes. It's just an observation, no rigorous study. If the question actually is "why", there isn't much of an option. If it isn't really "why", it's safer to word it more precisely. | |
| Mar 1, 2015 at 20:58 | comment | added | killermist | @fixer1234 Sometimes "Why is [x]?" and implied "How do I fix [symptom of x]?" is exactly the right way to characterize the problem. If a title is a statement of some sort, then it's just an statement. I can't do anything with statements. Statements don't inquisition desire to fix things. In a question/answer forum, someone stating a statement, and a not a question, is more likely to be treated with apathy because they're not looking to know anything. "Great, your [x] is doing [y], causing you problem [z]. Why should I care?" | |
| Feb 26, 2015 at 19:47 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @killermist - I seem to recall another school of thought expressed previously in Meta that titles shouldn't be weighed down with superfluous words. Some people were on a run to eliminate the "question" words because they were redundant. Plus questions can be problem statements. You also have to be careful of the word choice. "Why" tends to flag a "too broad" question, and the question is really "How do I fix..." rather than "Why". Guess that's why there's both vanilla and chocolate ice cream. | |
| Feb 26, 2015 at 19:03 | comment | added | killermist | @pgr As a person that thinks that titles should be questions (this being question/answer and all), I would rephrase the title to, "Why do some applications recently suffer from terrible font rendering?" The body then lays out the details that belong in the body. This also provides a benefit with search engines for which partial and total phrase matches get weighted higher than other matches that just happen to have the right keywords. Often I "ask" Google (or other) a question and find an answer because someone titled their thing with the same or similar question. (I hate non-question titles) | |
| Feb 20, 2015 at 22:28 | comment | added | pgr | I like your logic and suggestion. | |
| Feb 20, 2015 at 20:33 | history | edited | fixer1234 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Feb 20, 2015 at 20:12 | history | answered | fixer1234 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |