It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Misleading Thread Titles - a small request.

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Hello,

I have suggestion for ATS boards:

It could be fair to begin a policy, where every thread that is titled in a way, where there is no direct correspondence between contents of the thread and the title of the thread, would be either deleted or re-titled by moderators.

I think that I am not only one to notice that recently (well and as long as I've been on ATS) there has been threads titled completely misleading manner. One of the main purposes for this behavior must be solely the intention to get as many people to read the "message" as possible.

I object this kind of heading into extent that I don't anymore even open posts that aren't titled properly. I would post few examples here, but I refrain from insulting anyone personally, so I make few "imaginary" examples from thin air.

Example 1:

Title: An incredible event, everyone must see!!!11!
Contents of thread: Perhaps something funny, gross, perhaps even entertaining, but hardly anything that would interest anybody else than the poster and few other persons.

Example 2:

Title: To believe is bollocks!
Contents of thread: Criticism towards religions, faith or other metaphysical conception, while poster is simultaneously advertising other beliefs, basically poster's own ones.

Example 3:

Title: Everyone is generalizing!!1!
Contents of thread: As the title refers, something that is falsely generalized to the matters that has nothing to do with them.

In my opinion, it would be preferable that title reveals to the average reader the contents of the thread, even in ambiguous manner. In any scientific work, this is mandatory. I know internet debate forums are hardly scientific, but this manner is observed to be good, a more reader friendly solution. You rarely see a book called Pigs, then it's all about cows.

I apologize if this has already been suggested. I did quick search with keywords (topic, title and thread) and found no relevant threads on the first few pages of results.

In the end, if this is not adopted as official ATS policy, I would kindly ask the thread starters that they would kindly consider the reader instead of themselves (their points, stars, flags, flames whatever) and use consideration when giving a title for their threads.

Thank you,

-v

[edit on 3-11-2009 by v01i0]




posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   
hear , hear


i too notice this .

and i have some translations for thread titles like :

"must read " = why did i waste my time reading this ?

" absolute proof " = nothing of the sort

" clear pictures " = fuzzy crap

" best evidence " = worst speculation

etc etc



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Misleading thread titles like :I know the truth, now what?
hahaha
joking!



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


Yeah, generally the case is just as you pointed out, couldn't have said it better. That was something I was looking in my OP - thanks for crystallizing my idea


-v



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by GW8UK
 


Hehe, think that you caught me? Well, you might.

You should've took a look on the contents. Topic and title in there are corresponding with each other. I know the truth(which is I don't know nothing!)


But yeah, that is not one of my most considered topics.

-v



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


I understand what your saying with this post, i especially hate the threads whereby the title is a lie
e.g
'Abu Hanzer is dead!!!'
and then going on in the topic to talk about why he is 'dead' to the OP, talking strickly metaphorically ect ect.
there needs to be punishments in place for things like that controlled by mods.

although i know that i myself am quite the duplicate thread poster, but its always an accident as i get so excited by thread posting i forget about checking for them.



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by GW8UK
 


I know what you mean.


Originally posted by GW8UK
reply to post by v01i0
 

although i know that i myself am quite the duplicate thread poster, but its always an accident as i get so excited by thread posting i forget about checking for them.


Hey, that can happen to almost anyone.

-v



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by v01i0
 


i second...or third or fourth this motion.

it's just plain annoying...

and it kind of goes hand in hand with people who post topics that are just to bait, an not only does it not help anything, the OP never returns..



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Ha ha, nicely summed up Ignorant Ape.
Should have you as a Mod so you can retitle them correctly !!



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
I understand the need for drawing attention to threads...

Attention grabbing titles are simply an attempt to distinguish themselves out of many. However a blatantly misleading Title should be removed. No matter how sensationalized the title may be it should match the content of the thread.





posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
I understand the need for drawing attention to threads...

Attention grabbing titles are simply an attempt to distinguish themselves out of many.


I see your point.

Nevertheless, one can compose an distinguishing title even when keeping it corresponding to the contents of thread in it. Besides, those threads encompassed in this thread are rarely very original.

But yeah, there's nothing wrong being original or personal on title choices as long as they somehow hints to the contents of the thread.

-v



posted on Nov, 3 2009 @ 11:39 AM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

There is a perfect example the thread title has NOTHING to do with the thread.
I do not know how it works i have seen mods change titles to fit the thred time to time.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Dang it. I was just going to use this title...

FoxNews: Liberal racist reptilian black cop shoves veil-wearing woman into puppy at ground zero mosque, removes veil, and finds zionist illuminati alien

Back to the drawing board. Sigh.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:58 AM
link   
I think what you are referring to here is 'I have to over-state myself and/or over-embellish my titles to be heard', as if god forbid the voice may drown underneath the water.....these titles are either made by 16 year old boys, or by someone who doesn't truly believe in what they are saying OR someone who is trying to convince you of something which is false OR just something to create a stir or anger......I do know what you mean, it be can be really frustrating, and in the end not really worth reading.
I think that the title and the small print should compliment each other, and in context - for example someone who is trying to lead a topic but not to try and 'convert' you to their views but rather be intrigued by their own point of view and to draw you in for an opinion or an open discussion of views....... A few marketting ploys here and there is expected lol, but in general if you want to find pearls it won't be in lines with 'bollocks' or 'you are all the mindless masses' or 'you are all sheep'. I am not sure those people even realise what is lol.
I am new but already after a couple of days I have noticed this. I have seen good threads also however.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:27 AM
link   
I, too, second this notion. And while we're at it, how about a ban on titles written in all caps, with five exclamation points at the end. Because, if a title is written like that, then it had better be some serious business!


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 02:45 AM
link   
It won't happen.
Well it kind of already does a bit, the mods do a decent job generally and are all over it if they feel titles need modification.
However sometimes I am left baffled by the decisions not to change thread titles, which is fine as long as the thread then gets moved to a more appropriate forum but even sometimes that does not happen. It seems that a glorious tag line and number of hits take a precedent over facts here. I mean you have to remember that these threads are subject to come up under a google search and people like students will see it and possibly think it is fact.
It's strange for a site who prides itself on critical thinking and denying ignorance that they would let it blossom on their watch.

Having said all that the mods do a great job and it's not easy for them and it is understandable that occasionally a few might slip through.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by v01i0
Title: An incredible event, everyone must see!!!11!
Title: To believe is bollocks!
Title: Everyone is generalizing!!1!
The ATS Terms and conditions say: "By becoming a member of these domains, you agree to the following:
1). Posting: You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate."I would say that one could argue those thread titles are not accurate, and possibly misleading.

I started a thread about a TV show, and of course the title of my thread contained the name of the TV show. Before I started the thread I ran a search to make sure nobody else had started a thread about it.

So somebody posts in my thread they already started a thread about that TV show, but guess what? The name of the TV show wasn't in the title! I can't tell you how annoyed I was by that. How do they expect any search to find that when they don't even put the title of the show in the thread title? It's inexcusable!

I don't expect everyone to pick the perfect title but some of them are intentionally obscure and I think the T&C could be more explicit about selecting titles that are descriptive of the topic and not some general gibberish like "OMG you have to see this!!".



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Titles can get you into trouble. I posted a thread, not too long ago, gave quotes and the source. Suddenly eveyone is crucifying me and calling me a fear monger. It turns out, that after I posted the thread, the author of the source changed their title. I didn't realize what was going on until someone pointed out in a post that the author of the article said they had edited their original article. But I got flamed five more times before a mod stepped in.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join