Comment by ggdG
1 year ago
> I think reading the top comment on that post provides plenty of explanation why users would flag that post.
That top comment complains that the HN title is WSJ's informative subheading instead of its clickbaity headline.
1 year ago
> I think reading the top comment on that post provides plenty of explanation why users would flag that post.
That top comment complains that the HN title is WSJ's informative subheading instead of its clickbaity headline.
The top comment complains that the title submitted to HN is both not the original headline, and not an accurate characterization of the content of the article.
If there's no possible title to use for a submission that won't get it flagged, then clearly it's not a great article to be submitting.
And it's disingenuous for you to pretend that the issue is HN users being unwilling to reexamine the public health response to Covid-19, when the submission is clearly flouting HN's rules. (The paywall doesn't help its viability as an HN submission, either.)
> The top comment complains that the title submitted to HN is both not the original headline, and not an accurate characterization of the content of the article.
What do you mean: "not an accurate characterization of the content of the article"? The title pretty accurately describes an admission by the former NIAID director in a House Select Subcommittee, according to the WSJ. That admission is the topic of the article.
> And it's disingenuous for you to pretend that the issue is HN users being unwilling to reexamine the public health response to Covid-19, when the submission is clearly flouting HN's rules.
From HN's rules:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait;
I think using the clickbaity original title ("Anthony Fauci Fesses Up") would be flouting HN's rules.