Can you please let me know your exact thoughts and feelings as verbosely as possible? I'm training a very specific AI model and need this data - just kidding.
It’s kinda disturbing how precient that was. At the time it felt like surely now forewarned by many popular stories we wouldn’t make the same mistakes.
apparently my former title was too much for this site: "iPissed: Apple is after web capabilities to protect close-to-100B App Store Tax"
which was relating to the article (and you can read the title of the original article after clicking) but I did not like "kills web apps" because it is not true in my opinion, tries to kill web apps or fights against them or cripples them in the next iOS release...
it sounded too eternal and I think Apple will be forced by DMA to do the opposite
I really am curiouos why and who did my creativity bother?
I found guidelines not rules:
"Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."
For me, "kill web apps" is misleading since we have to wait and see how the EU reacts. The original title is more of a clickbait.
I am not a power user of hacker news. I found a title to fill in and did my best.
Had I seen there a link to the guidelines or a text like: please use original title if possible, I would have done it. It is actually 1 minute "site engineering" to mention this on the submission page.
The title you submitted ("iPissed: Apple is after web capabilities to protect close to 100B App Store Tax") broke that guideline badly. It's standard moderation practice to revert titles when submitters do this. If you felt the original title was misleading, then it would have been correct to change it, but definitely not by editorializing and making it more baity. On HN, being the submitter of an article doesn't confer any special rights over the title—I know other forums work differently, but this is an important point to understand about this one.
It's also standard moderation practice to downweight follow-up stories when a major ongoing topic has already had significant discussion recently, as this one has. We can argue about whether or not the story should have been formally marked a [dupe], but the basic moderation call to downweight it as a follow-up thread was, again, the standard one. Otherwise HN's front page would routinely be filled with follow-up discussions of the same few topics—whichever ones are most controversial that week—and that is not the site we're trying to have here.
It's not a problem, of course, that you were inexperienced with how HN works and broke the rules by accident. HN can be a cryptic place and it can take a while to get oriented. What's not fine, though, is posting indignant comments complaining about how you've been mistreated by what is in fact ordinary practice. Such meta drama is off-topic in the threads and has a way of taking over discussion if allowed to, so please don't do it again.
You're welcome on HN! Just please make sure not to post in the flamewar style to HN threads. Again, I know other forums work differently, but we're trying for thoughtful, curious conversation here, and flamewar destroys that, so that's the most important thing to avoid while commenting.
you have experience with others and if clickbait is a problem, original title is totally ok for me
others wrote it is outrageous I think I would not have even recognized the duplicate flag or that the title changed myself :) it gave me the false impression something bad happened to me :)
you can totally remove these comments of mine complaining, I iterated on this now and everything ok!
yeah this you are terrible comment may have been too much, I will not be personal in the future!
Thanks for the kind replies! Don't worry, the only thing that matters is using HN in the intended spirit going forward. If you have questions in the future, feel free to send them our way at [email protected].
It's alright, you know now for your next submission.
Regarding the dupe removal: I am slightly inclined towards your side, because it's not really a dupe, but, still I understand where the mods are coming from, especially if a good amount of discussion already happened around the same topic recently.
Regulation doesn't have to be the answer though. The very same people talking out of both sides of their mouths here are the ones who can choose to just not invest in it.
Lock up the hardware in an offline facility and experiment there, if they really think it's important. Hell, even just skipping the double speak would be a big step. If they really aren't concerned with the risk then own it, don't tell me its risky while also releasing a new, more powerful version every 6-12 months.
