Alternative to "click bait" rule: block threads

[Thumpalumpacus]

I guess I just don't see this as an issue, myself.

[SteelCurtain]

This is dumb.

We have already altered literally like 15 threads. You probably didn't even notice.

I don't know, for the life of me, how this is even remotely controversial. No one gets punished. We just change the name, drop a speed bump or a PM, and move on.

The rule is maybe not well named. Your thread title can be as click-baity as you can possibly make it so long as it gives us an idea of what the thread is about.

Having another group that as far as I can tell is no different from ignore would be adversarial and unnecessary.

This isn't a huge deal. Calm down. No one's free speech rights are being hampered by staff asking to have your thread titles be descriptive. Jesus Christ on a cupcake.

[robvalue]

It's different because putting people on ignore leaves their threads in view, it just blocks their posts when in a thread. This would allow you to not have to look at these threads which are apparently upsetting people; although I don't know who.

How is it adversarial? No one would know who has blocked who, any more than they know about it with ignore lists.

Well, I've had my say and suggested alternative action, so I'll drop it now. The point is, there appears to be no reason to have this rule at all, and it could potentially cause a lot of problems and arguments. I'm suggesting a less adversarial way of dealing with it.

I'm perfectly calm. I'm trying to save you guys flak in the long run.

[Edwardo Piet]

What about people who post 70% clickbaity things, but the remainder good discussion worthy threads? Instead of blocking altogether, why not just leave it up to people to report which titles they find clickbait and threads with enough votes will require the original poster to change the title

That's basically how it is already, lol.

[Silver]

As you have already mentioned in the the Min's absence thread, I also find it very difficult to believe that anyone was complaining about that which for the click-baiting rule was implemented.

My thing was I always moved from one thread to the next if I did not care for its contents. I thought nothing about the title which led me to that thread, because honestly only a low life twat would do that.

[Edwardo Piet]

The rule is maybe not well named. Your thread title can be as click-baity as you can possibly make it so long as it gives us an idea of what the thread is about.

I suggest perhaps change the name of the rule to "Misleading Thread Titles".

The main reason I'd like this is because I find the idea of a rule regarding changing the name of misleading titles to have its own title changed for being misleading rather deliciously ironically hilarious.

[Silver]

I wonder if perhaps changing a thread title that inherently has nothing wrong with it except that some lowlife thinks it is misleading in relation to the thread contents would be an infringement on a body of work?

I mean why do we not just all go around and starting changing titles of books to better reflect what we personally think it should be in order to reflect the contents of what we have personally read and interpreted?

[SteelCurtain]

When you own the book, you can go ahead and change the title. Write on the cover with the crayon your mommy gave you.

Your understanding of the concept of Freedom of Speech is underwhelming.

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

I honestly don't understand why this rule has been so controversial lol.

I don't think it's controversial. It just seems like an unnecessary rule to have.

Perhaps a small change while making a thread near the textbox for title tibs could display, "please choose a meaningful title" or other. Just seems completely unnecessary to create a new rule for it and have staff change them. Makes it comes across as less freedom for posters and more control for staff (smaller government, dammit!). I still don't know why this rule was made was there overwhelming complaints about click baity threads? Even if that were the case if you don't like a title then don't click on it.. Even if you did click on it if you don't like it just press the back button.. What's the big deal

[Edwardo Piet]

I think it's a fantastic rule. I don't think it's a boring rule. I think it's a simple rule. I think it's bored members, lol.

---

I do think the Clickbait rule should have it's name changed to "Misleading Title Rule" for having a misleading title. Other than the misleading title this misleading title rule is just great.