Ship of Fools: Clearer thread titles for Purgatory?

Thread: Clearer thread titles for Purgatory? Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=026292

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

I think someone mentioned this a while back but not in the right place. I'd like to mention it again.

Currently in Purgatory on the first page we have

quote:
Are these people complete prats?
15 Minutes
You want fries* with that?
and
Satisfied?

none of which give the slightest clue as to what the thread is actually about.

Thinking back a while, What happened to all the fish was a memorable title but one that meant I completely missed the discussion on the mistaken assumption it was about depleting stocks of herring in the North Sea.

Might there be something to be gained by calling for a bit more clarity?

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

Dunno, given what people think is clear and simple, I am not certain it would be much of an improvement.

This used to annoy me a bit, but a quick glance at the first post in any thread doesn't take an incredible amount of time.

Posted by pererin (# 16956) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
This used to annoy me a bit, but a quick glance at the first post in any thread doesn't take an incredible amount of time.

It does if you're creating a new thread, and you're trying to make sure there isn't already one on the same topic lurking under a stupid obscurantist name.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

Given the short portion of the title displayed, I am not certain this is anything other than inevitable, regardless of intent.

Posted by Organ Builder (# 12478) on :

Hmmm...if you are opening a thread, I can tell you I'm far more likely to open it and read the OP if I'm not quite certain what the thread is about. It piques my natural curiosity. You could title a thread "Churches paying for publicity access" and I wouldn't give it a second glance. If you title it "What price fame?" I'll read at least the first paragraph of the OP and might click on a link if it's presented well enough.

If we were getting 20 or 30 new threads started each day, a little more clarity in the titles would probably be necessary. I don't know what the averages are, but I suspect we don't average 20 new threads per day on the entire Ship. I'd be surprised if Purg averages more than five new threads per day--and of that five or less, some of them have very clear titles.

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

If we're going for clearer thread titles, why restrict it to Purg?

Personally, I'm happy with the way things are; I have no problem reading OPs if I want to know what a given discussion is about. And much would be lost if we applied the clarity principle elsewhere. I love that the cooking thread in Heaven is titled "Burnt Offerings."

[ 07. October 2013, 16:47: Message edited by: Porridge ]

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

quote:
Originally posted by pererin:
It does if you're creating a new thread, and you're trying to make sure there isn't already one on the same topic lurking under a stupid obscurantist name.

One person's stupid obscurantism is another's witty allusion. It's like book titles - you want to both attract attention and encapsulate something about your take on the topic.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

That would be an even better standard, but failing that I'd prefer clarity to things along the lines of "satisfied" or "not again" or "what do you think about this?"

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:
Hmmm...if you are opening a thread, I can tell you I'm far more likely to open it and read the OP if I'm not quite certain what the thread is about. It piques my natural curiosity.

ditto

Posted by TheAlethiophile (# 16870) on :

It's the art of clickbaiting. There can be a fine line between that and trolling.

Make sure it's interesting, but don't be misleading. If someone started a thread called "Dawkins and the gay-friendly mass" I'm sure that would get a lot of curious clicks. I'm not proposing that anyone does that; it's probably unwarranted.

Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
I love that the cooking thread in Heaven is titled "Burnt Offerings."

Me too. I also love that it has a subheading: "recipe thread, 2013."

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Given the short portion of the title displayed, I am not certain this is anything other than inevitable, regardless of intent.

When you're on the page for Purgatory, you get the entire thread title.

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :

Suggestion: Start reading the boards through the recent updates link where you will see not just the title but the opening lines of recent posts.

Jengie

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Given the short portion of the title displayed, I am not certain this is anything other than inevitable, regardless of intent.
When you're on the page for Purgatory, you get the entire thread title.

True. I fade back to my original comment of one person's clear is another's murky.

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
Suggestion: Start reading the boards through the recent updates link where you will see not just the title but the opening lines of recent posts.

If you do that you only get the most popular/recently posted to threads and they will be a mixture of the "top 10" of the various boards. You can miss out on some potentially quite interesting threads that were posted when there were fewer people around and have since gone dormant. If you go via the standard menu, it's all laid out in front of you and you get to pick and choose. Truncated thread titles are a small price to pay for that, IMO.

Though having said that, the Earwig O'Agen thread title annoyed me a lot (sorry) because I kept on reading it as "Earwig O'Hagan" and wondering who on earth that was supposed to be.

Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :

Pros and cons wise, there's clarity - and then there are the terrible things that happen to shippie's blood pressure if you fiddle with their carefully honed phrases ...

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Though having said that, the Earwig O'Agen thread title annoyed me a lot (sorry) because I kept on reading it as "Earwig O'Hagan" and wondering who on earth that was supposed to be.

That one confused me too. We don't need that much cuteness.

Moo

Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :

I'm on a home brewing forum that gets at least 20-30 new threads per day. Let me tell you, clever yet somewhat unclear titles are much better than some of the homebrewtalk new brewer thread title greatest hits, such as "Would this work?" "Did I Screw Up?" "Help!" and "I'm an idiot!". I'll happily take the ship's creative license culture.

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Though having said that, the Earwig O'Agen thread title annoyed me a lot (sorry) because I kept on reading it as "Earwig O'Hagan" and wondering who on earth that was supposed to be.

At the risk of getting myself branded as one who reads with her lips moving, I simply sounded it out when I saw it, realized what it meant, and, with Syria recently in the news, understood what the thread would be about without reading it.

If I had issues with the title, it was that it seemed too light-hearted for such a serious topic.
But different strokes & all that.

Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :

I've always wondered why the weight loss thread in All Saints is called Safe from Kidnapping.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

The bicycling thread, "My Chain Fell Off," is most admirably named, to anybody familiar with Charles Wesley's oeuvre.

Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:

quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Though having said that, the Earwig O'Agen thread title annoyed me a lot (sorry) because I kept on reading it as "Earwig O'Hagan" and wondering who on earth that was supposed to be.
At the risk of getting myself branded as one who reads with her lips moving, I simply sounded it out when I saw it, realized what it meant, and, with Syria recently in the news, understood what the thread would be about without reading it....

Nope, still no clue whatsoever. What do earwigs have to do with Syria?

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemr:
I've always wondered why the weight loss thread in All Saints is called Safe from Kidnapping.

I had no idea that is what it is about. I thought it was something to do with children and worries for the safety, which some casual reading did not clarify.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
The bicycling thread, "My Chain Fell Off," is most admirably named, to anybody familiar with Charles Wesley's oeuvre.

The actual thread title is

quote:
"My chain fell off.....": A cycling thread

which is admirably clear as well as witty, along Firenze's book title lines.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:

quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Though having said that, the Earwig O'Agen thread title annoyed me a lot (sorry) because I kept on reading it as "Earwig O'Hagan" and wondering who on earth that was supposed to be.
At the risk of getting myself branded as one who reads with her lips moving, I simply sounded it out when I saw it, realized what it meant, and, with Syria recently in the news, understood what the thread would be about without reading it....
Nope, still no clue whatsoever. What do earwigs have to do with Syria?

Ear - wi - g O' - Agen
Here - we - go - again

The title has naught to do with earwigs or {i[directly[/i] with Syria.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Ear - wi - g O' - Agen
Here - we - go - again

That's really lame. And clear as mud.

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

The 'Safe from Kidnapping' riffs on the idea that whatever the downsides of being overweight, at least it makes you difficult to snatch off the streets.

This may not always be the case.

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

I am a member of a (labrador) forum which insists on clear, understandable thread titles.

It's boring!

I love the enigmatic ones - and once you have discovered what it's about you know anyway.

This is a board for unrest after all [Smile]

Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Ear - wi - g O' - Agen
Here - we - go - again

The title has naught to do with earwigs or {i[directly[/i] with Syria.

"This verbal class distinction by now should be antique." -- Prof. Henry Higgins

Seriously, if a thread title is only meaningful to people with a particular accent, it's by definition meaningless to anyone else. And deliberately so.

Posted by Hart (# 4991) on :

This is the kind of issue where I'm glad we leave the larger part of discretion to our OPs. Choosing a good title is part of the art of writing a good OP. I'd hate to see that aspect of shiply life taken over by too many rules. On some other boards (I'm not as familiar with purg), the hosts will edit a title if there's an obvious mispelling or if it's far too general (otherwise Eccles would be full of threads entitled "a question"), but otherwise like a title sink of swim on its own.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

There is no accounting for taste.

If, however, you find a particular Shipmate is annoying you regularly with their thread titles, might I suggest you could always attempt to knock some sense into them by calling them to Hell.

Posted by Sarkycow (# 1012) on :

Bit boring in Hell lately is it orfeo?

Stop trying to drum up trade [Razz]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sarkycow:
Bit boring in Hell lately is it orfeo?

I had to act decisively to restrict discussions of car driving and car parking to only 2 threads rather than 3. Need I say more?

Posted by JoannaP (# 4493) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:

quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemr:
I've always wondered why the weight loss thread in All Saints is called Safe from Kidnapping.
I had no idea that is what it is about. I thought it was something to do with children and worries for the safety, which some casual reading did not clarify.

I think the previous incarnation of the thread had a link to this page.

Posted by St Everild (# 3626) on :

Last years weight loss thread was titled "Fat People are Harder to Kidnap" which might cast some light on this year's title?

Posted by comet (# 10353) on :

[shamelessly birdwalking]

quote:
Originally posted by JoannaP:

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet:

quote:
Originally posted by Nicolemr:
I've always wondered why the weight loss thread in All Saints is called Safe from Kidnapping.
I had no idea that is what it is about. I thought it was something to do with children and worries for the safety, which some casual reading did not clarify.
I think the previous incarnation of the thread had a link to this page.

wow. from that link:

quote:
Due to the lapse in government funding, this website is not available.
We sincerely regret this inconvenience.

Uncylopedia is government funded? while I'm aware it's probably not true and just making a point, it still makes me REAL CURIOUS where my tax dollars go.

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

**(Raising head too far above handy parapet)**

AHEM, flaming sky-object. Isn't there an existing thread on thread derailment? Or should there be?

Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :

Strictly speaking, comets are icy.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

Although periodically they heat up and things get really spectacular.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

Is this the point on the thread where I flounce?

Posted by comet (# 10353) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
**(Raising head too far above handy parapet)**

AHEM, flaming sky-object. Isn't there an existing thread on thread derailment? Or should there be?

moi?

yeah. okay. whoops.

(I was going to say "bite me" but the Styx hosts are looking...)

Posted by Earwig (# 12057) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ariel:
Though having said that, the Earwig O'Agen thread title annoyed me a lot (sorry) because I kept on reading it as "Earwig O'Hagan" and wondering who on earth that was supposed to be.

I had a couple of confused days when that thread first started...

[ 09. October 2013, 10:23: Message edited by: Earwig ]

Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :

Some of us have confused days every day of the week!

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

And, when it isn't a confused day it's just too confusing!

Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Is this the point on the thread where I flounce?

You could start a thread about curtain making with that title.

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Is this the point on the thread where I flounce?
You could start a thread about curtain making with that title.

I think it would need to be: Is this the point on the flounce where I thread?

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

It's curtains for me then.

Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :

Just pull yourself together man!

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Time to draw things to a close?

Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :

Good Call.

Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :

I'm blinded by your puns.

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

Tsk. So much window dressing if you ask me.

Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :

quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
I'm blinded by your puns.

I go to Venice to think of them.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

Y'all stop being shady.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

Maybe I'll do a runner instead. (Just in case I fall, I'll put on a crash pelmet first).

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

I'd seriously question a site which policed thread titles bud allowed punning. Talk about perverted priority.

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

Under the New Order, all thread titles must be completely explanatory and not less than two lines long. There will be no puns. Or jokes. Or frivolity of any kind. All threads will be monitored for uniformity, conformity and monotony - and only be allowed to procede if they possess all three.

Posted by Welease Woderwick (# 10424) on :

...and perfect spelling, of course [Razz]

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

...you want to work in a legislative drafting office???

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

Every time I see "How to heal stigma" I read it as "How to heal stigmata."

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Firenze:
Under the New Order, all thread titles must be completely explanatory and not less than two lines long. There will be no puns. Or jokes. Or frivolity of any kind. All threads will be monitored for uniformity, conformity and monotony - and only be allowed to procede if they possess all three.

No, no, no. What we must do is give every thread an alpha-numerical code as a title which conforms to the requirements of the Library of Congress cataloguing system, and newbies are not allowed to post in Hell until they've memorized it.

Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :

Speaking as a trained librarian, I've always enjoyed the logic behind Rajanathan's colon classification, myself.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Every time I see "How to heal stigma" I read it as "How to heal stigmata."

You, too?

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

Dewey. Though I grant you the 21s are a little concerning:

211 Concepts of God
212 Existence, attributes of God
213 Creation
214 Theodicy
215 Science & religion
216 No longer used—formerly Evil
217 No longer used—formerly Prayer

Posted by pererin (# 16956) on :

Dewey sucks:
1) How do you fit 301.1543012917492705694 on the spine of a book?
2) There are nasty overlaps: a whole load of categories under 362 have the same names as categories under the 610s.
3) Certain subjects get scattered to the four winds. Archaeology is 930. Unless it's Numismatics, when it's 737 (yes, between carving and ceramics, because obviously you're interested in Roman coins because you want to make some). Or Epigraphy, when it's 411.7. Or when some genius has decided to go all retro and keep it at 571, which I suppose is at least next to Anthropology.
4) 813 vs 823 relies on a librarian noticing whether an author was an American or not. Similarly 811 v 821.

I much much prefer libraries that use the Library of Congress system, as things just end up being shelved in a much more sensible order.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

I like the "Used Book Store System" -- filed by author's last name in broad subject areas.

Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on :

You all would love our local libraries - due to a merger, they're partially LC, and partially Dewey. (And all screwed up...)

[eta - I can spell, honest...]

[ 10. October 2013, 20:56: Message edited by: jbohn ]

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by PeteC:
Speaking as a trained librarian, I've always enjoyed the logic behind Rajanathan's colon classification, myself.

OK, PeteC, give. I googled, honest; I came up with tennis players, docs in Florida and other places, and the odd experimental science whiz in something-or-other.

What is this Rajanathan (and/or her or his or its colon) of which you speak? May we at least be reassured it's not a medical condition?

Posted by Firenze (# 619) on :

Ranganathan.

I only remember this from DipLib on account of one of the other postgrads had a Ranganathan Rocks or some such T-shirt. That, the drawing of Snoopy in WWI flying ace mode with the caption 'Curse you Melvin Dewey!' and a vodka ad running at the time with the strap line 'I was the mainstay of the public library until I discovered Smirnoff' were the humorous high points of our year.

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

Ah. Many thanks. Correct spelling: key to the Interwebby Multiverse.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

In the university city in France in which I now reside, until at least the late 1980s the books were classified on the shelves by... order of acquisition. The result being that you could not find a book unless you were able to fill in a form with its exact title, and could not simply browse the shelves in a given field. In fact most books were not on public display at all.

This offers an insightful comparison between the US "information accessible to all" approach and the French "keep knowledge in the hands of the elite who best know what to do with it and how to dispense it" perspective.

(All of which is to say, I'm keeping tabs on this thread, and yes that is a pun).

Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
In the university city in France in which I now reside, until at least the late 1980s the books were classified on the shelves by... order of acquisition. The result being that you could not find a book unless you were able to fill in a form with its exact title, and could not simply browse the shelves in a given field. In fact most books were not on public display at all.

This offers an insightful comparison between the US "information accessible to all" approach and the French "keep knowledge in the hands of the elite who best know what to do with it and how to dispense it" perspective.

(All of which is to say, I'm keeping tabs on this thread, and yes that is a pun).

What on earth did the librarians do? Did they have to memorize the entire collection, the way London cabbies have to acquire The Knowledge?

[ 11. October 2013, 22:25: Message edited by: Porridge ]

Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
In the university city in France in which I now reside, until at least the late 1980s the books were classified on the shelves by... order of acquisition. The result being that you could not find a book unless you were able to fill in a form with its exact title, and could not simply browse the shelves in a given field. In fact most books were not on public display at all.

This offers an insightful comparison between the US "information accessible to all" approach and the French "keep knowledge in the hands of the elite who best know what to do with it and how to dispense it" perspective.

(All of which is to say, I'm keeping tabs on this thread, and yes that is a pun).

What on earth did the librarians do? Did they have to memorize the entire collection, the way London cabbies have to acquire The Knowledge?

Do you really think the librarians are there to lend books? No, they catalogue books and keep them safe. The last thing a librarian wants is a book leaving the library.

I should add that I've met bookshop owners with a similar attitude.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I should add that I've met bookshop owners with a similar attitude.

First season second episode of Black Books!

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
What on earth did the librarians do? Did they have to memorize the entire collection, the way London cabbies have to acquire The Knowledge?

Hapless would-be readers filled out a form and handed it to the librarian. They would then disappear (usually indefinitely), the theory being that they would look up the book's location in a card index (presumably sorted by author).

Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :

LOC??? [Paranoid]

Dewey Decimal forever!

{Marches back and forth with hand-painted sign.}

Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:

quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
What on earth did the librarians do? Did they have to memorize the entire collection, the way London cabbies have to acquire The Knowledge?
Hapless would-be readers filled out a form and handed it to the librarian. They would then disappear (usually indefinitely), the theory being that they would look up the book's location in a card index (presumably sorted by author).

THis is more or less what I was going to post as a guess, but I thought it looked excessively snarky given the very many dedicated and helpful librarians I have dealt with.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

I don't know about thread titles, but I have to say that I find this slightly annoying. How far can they go before the innermost nested quote is just a vertical stack of letters?

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
I don't know about thread titles, but I have to say that I find this slightly annoying. How far can they go before the innermost nested quote is just a vertical stack of letters?

But if you leave anything out than your interlocutor will get in a snit and say, "As I said in the part YOU FAILED TO QUOTE..." as if by failing to quote it, I thought it would prevent people from scrolling up and seeing it.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

There is arguably a middle road where people delete the centre part of the 'nest' on the grounds that it's already been available 5 times.

But of course the correct response is 'buy a widescreen monitor'.

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
orfeo: But of course the correct response is 'buy a widescreen monitor'.

LOL, Ship posts have the same width independently of your monitor. It just means that you'll have a bigger blue-grey area to the right.

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

Curses! You saw through the flaw in my pathetically flippant joke!

Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on :

quote:
orfeo: Curses! You saw through the flaw in my pathetically flippant joke!

It's Monday morning where you are, so I guess that counts as an excuse [Smile]

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

Plus, he's Australian.

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

Means he sees everything upside down, right?

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

HEY!!

Posted by Clint Boggis (# 633) on :

Dragging this back to the topic....

I came here from Purgatory to raise a couple of issues and see that Eutychus has already done it.

My complaint is on dual grounds:

unhelpful thread titles
foreign language phrases, esp in titles

I can see it might be funny or make a point or show off your knowledge to make a witty or clever title but if it obscures the meaning for others, it fails. People like me who don't read everything (unlike hosts and the really bored) just won't bother and potentially interesting contributions are lost. I look at Purgatory and skim the thread titles to see if any topic stands out as interesting. A lazy or thoughtless title (eg "what do you think of this...?", "would you let them get away with it?") or an obscure title (unless it's intriguing) actually makes me less likely to read it.

I wondered for some days why there was no thread on the US Government Shutdown. Some may have guessed, or searched for words like 'US Government' or read everything and stumbled across it but I missed it for several days before seeing that there were a lot of responses so maybe it wasn't the dull whine the title led me to assume.

Thread titles are like book titles and should give an idea of the subject so people can decide whether to engage. At least a book is shelved with others on the same subject, our need for a meaningful title is greater (Purg I'm thinking of).

There's even a thread in Purg with a (I assume) Latin title which means nothing to people who manage English but nothing else. [PS Thanks to B62 who edited the title]

Why can't people put a meaningful English title on a thread? It's not a lot to ask. I'd also like to encourage hosts to amend unhelpful titles where necessary.

[ 14. October 2013, 10:56: Message edited by: Clint Boggis ]

Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :

Some have said they prefer clever titles, some have said they prefer clear titles. So who gets served?

ETA: I've just as often seen the reverse of your complaint. I've had my time wasted by thread titles which were much more interesting than their content.

[ 14. October 2013, 14:56: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Some have said they prefer clever titles, some have said they prefer clear titles. So who gets served?

I think the win-win solutions, in order of priority are:

1. wit plus explanation:

As has been quoted on this thread, a good example is "Burnt offerings: reciped thread 2013".

2. playing it straight:

"Clearer thread titles for Purgatory" [Big Grin]

I think that in Purgatory at least, unclear thread titles ought to be fair game for hosts to edit, at least to add an explanatory gloss.

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :

Although, there is still no clear definition of "clear".

As an example, the use of a specific technical phrase that has a clear meaning to people with some background reading in a subject could easily be unclear to others (a recent example might be ex nihilo, which was a) perfectly clear to me and b) the added subtitle "much ado about nothing" is nice an witty but still doesn't make it clear that the thread is about creation from nothing). Another example could be a quote from a book, or even the title of a book, which again would be clear to people who have read, or even just seen something about, the book but could be totally obscure to others.

Clarity, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :

One thing also to consider when crafting a thread title is that your thread may make the big time and be featured on the front page. That happened to me one-- but my thread title was kind of "in-house" and Ancient Mariner changed it so that the casual reader would get it.

Posted by Pyx_e (# 57) on :

FWIW the more obscure the better, save me from simplicity and clarity. They never made anything simple or clear. Give me a poem, a story, a joke any day.

Fly Safe, Pyx_e

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pyx_e:
Give me a poem, a story, a joke any day.

OK, that comes in at 3 on my personal list, above 4, which is titles like "Satisfied?" that leave me anything but.

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

I would like to resurrect this thread and extend its remit to the Circus to plead for someone to fix the unresolved parenthesis in the thread title

quote:
Grandson of FLP (Famous Last Posts!

Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :

What about a circus game to come up with the most annoying title for pedants to have to see every day? Greengrocer's apostrophes, unbalanced parentheses, mixed US/UK spellings, semicolons where there should be colons.... no holds barred.

[ 25. October 2013, 08:41: Message edited by: mdijon ]

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I would like to resurrect this thread and extend its remit to the Circus to plead for someone to fix the unresolved parenthesis in the thread title
quote:
Grandson of FLP (Famous Last Posts!

Don't say we never do anything for you [Smile]

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

I bet you did that just because once you'd seen it, you couldn't stand it any more yourself [Razz]

(but thanks anyway!)

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0