Sub rules for /s/news were suggested and agreed upon by the phuks.co users. Please have a look at the sidebar and familiarise yourself with the brief set of sub rules before posting.
Thanks.
Not that I'd downvote, but sometimes headlines are stupid clickbait. I don't see a problem in users increasing headlines. I know it's against rules, but as long as it improves the experience, I'll back them.
Not that I'd downvote, but sometimes headlines are stupid clickbait. I don't see a problem in users increasing headlines. I know it's against rules, but as long as it improves the experience, I'll back them.
It's Rule 2! I'm for swift justice and deleting the posts. What's wrong with one place on earth having a simple rule that must be followed?
... you can always repost it. World news has no rules.
It's Rule 2! I'm for swift justice and deleting the posts. What's wrong with one place on earth having a simple rule that must be followed?
... you can always repost it. World news has no rules.
I noticed pembo changed the title on his post, but I didn't mention anything for this reason. And also because it's pembo.
He has my kids and he won't tell me if they're ok. Help.
edit: To clarify, I still think this rule is necessary.
I noticed pembo changed the title on his post, but I didn't mention anything for this reason. And also because it's pembo.
He has my kids and he won't tell me if they're ok. Help.
edit: To clarify, I still think this rule is necessary.
In dealing with this I'll often add in parentheses (the vital end of the sentence) to alleviate the click bait.
In dealing with this I'll often add in parentheses (the vital end of the sentence) to alleviate the click bait.
I see why but it's difficult to allow one edit and disallow another without accusations of mod abuse. Best to keep the rules clear and consistent I think.
I see why but it's difficult to allow one edit and disallow another without accusations of mod abuse. Best to keep the rules clear and consistent I think.
Isn't the solution to that not posting or upvoting clickbait?
There are frequently many sources for news, surely it's possible to find one that isn't clickbait/intentionally misleading to post.
Isn't the solution to that not posting or upvoting clickbait?
There are frequently many sources for news, surely it's possible to find one that isn't clickbait/intentionally misleading to post.
The problem is "increasing" is subjective so it can quickly lead to editorialising. One persons improvement is anothers tub thumping.
The problem is "increasing" is subjective so it can quickly lead to editorialising. One persons improvement is anothers tub thumping.
What if you're de-editorialising the original headline, often times titles are amped up for SEO/clickbait reasons on sites while the article (which is written by a different person) may be quality content.
What if you're de-editorialising the original headline, often times titles are amped up for SEO/clickbait reasons on sites while the article (which is written by a different person) may be quality content.
I get your point, but IM(notso)HO I think I do better than an editor paid for clicks. I'll revise titles whenever I find I'd be more objective. Not the other way.
I get your point, but IM(notso)HO I think I do better than an editor paid for clicks. I'll revise titles whenever I find I'd be more objective. Not the other way.
If you disagree with the sub rules please try and explain why rather than mutely downvote.