View Full Version : Thread titles must contain subject of thread
When creating a new thread, if you don't put the actual subject of the thread in the thread title, your whole thread is subject to deletion or closure.
Thread titles like "Hi" or "hahaha" or ":0)" or anything that does not accurately describe the subject of the thread is unacceptable.
Titles are very important so that our members know before they click on a thread what they will find there. It saves a lot of time, a lot of bandwidth, a lot of frustration if you properly identify the subject in the thread title.
If you want your thread to get a lot of attention, include the subject in the title because the search engines index that title and so anyone searching for your particular subject can find your thread on the forums.
So take a moment and THINK about the subject title before you start a new thread. This just makes sense.
Posting numerous threads without proper titles might result in the member being banned.
Got it?
Gee it's funny YOU should post the first response.
Get used to it. You've been warned.
honeyhannah
09-21-2006, 12:36 AM
I suppose, this will help.
But I have a question, what about personal forums. I looked over my threads before posting this, most of them contain the subject in the title. But since I know that we have the hover option on this forum, and I'm a writer and think in terms of a creative statement with my titles sometimes... such as with people who I know will get it, usually, if not always, in personal forums. I just wonder if this is okay.
We're less concerned about private forums. Hovering is good practice before selecting a thread to view, but the other reasons are still valid for putting the subject in.
You don't need to worry about old threads, just new ones.
I would much rather see descriptive titles than ones just used to entice people to view the thread. Many times they are misleading, and that is unfair.
This is just good netiquette. People who disregard this rule are no better than spammers cause they both just want your attention, regardless of whether you're actually interested.
Why waste your time pouring over threads that are not interesting just because the titles sound interesting...or vague enough to get you to click just to find out more.
Anyone who has been here as long as Insane Jester should know better.
And posting up an insulting banner is sure to get you banned.
We're less concerned about private forums. Hovering is good practice before selecting a thread to view, but the other reasons are still valid for putting the subject in.
You don't need to worry about old threads, just new ones.
I would much rather see descriptive titles than ones just used to entice people to view the thread. Many times they are misleading, and that is unfair.
This is just good netiquette. People who disregard this rule are no better than spammers cause they both just want your attention, regardless of whether you're actually interested.
Why waste your time pouring over threads that are not interesting just because the titles sound interesting...or vague enough to get you to click just to find out more.
Anyone who has been here as long as Insane Jester should know better.
And posting up an insulting banner is sure to get you banned.isn't that the point of the first few words popping up when you point?
isn't that the point of the first few words popping up when you point?Depending upon which thread list you're looking at you may or may NOT see a preview of the first post.
Recent unacceptable thread titles I've seen just today include:
"A question"
"breaking news"
"everybody..."
"fuck"
What would you think if EVERY thread had a title like that?
Also having to go thru a list and preview everything is a waste of time too. You shouldn't have to do that at all.
And I often hear from people that they can't find threads they participated in and it's usually do to a title that says NOTHING about the subject of the thread.
I think threads that have titles that don't describe the thread are often more interesting than the ones that do
also, alot of times in random thoughts and young hippies especially, the convo the thread changes drastically from the original topic, you can't really avoid that too much
and I think that too many rules are a huge problem in today's society, I would not like to see the fora reflect that
I mean, it's your site and all, and I am not yet a supporting member (need that bank account), but I would hope that you reconsider this, or exactly how you are going to go about this
personally, I think that the only threads that should contain soemthign descriptive in the title, are threads that are meant to have useful information
such as a thread with a question that alot of other people may have or what not
Yes, well we also have a rule against threads of "no value" of which most in RT forum qualify.
If you can't think up a decent title for your thread, then don't bother to post it, cause it's probably not worth our time to read.
I'm teaching you all netiquette, because so many are in need of it.
The reason this site is so popular and successful is because people ARE following the guidelines we set out. There's good reasons behind all of them.
We're not going to be nazis about this, but if people follow this rule it will benefit everyone.
If someone's going to demand our attention, they had better give us a reason for it in the title.
What do all these titles have in common?
"A question"
"breaking news"
"everybody..."
"fuck"
An attempt to get your attention by revealing NOTHING about what the thread contains, that's what.
And actually the more I have to write about this subject the more pissed off I get, especially when others just don't get it.
If I have to respond & explain this again, I will instead just start deleting threads with unacceptable titles (without even reading them.) Got it?
hippiehillbilly
09-23-2006, 12:17 AM
well theres a "fuck" titled thread in young hippies as i type..
its not been closed,..
is it subject to the moderaters discretion..
or is it a 0 tolerance policy??
As I said:
1. "We're not gonna be nazis about it."
2. "You don't need to worry about old threads, just new ones."
do I need to repeat again?
Here's another reason to put the subject in titles...
I just did a survey of threads and I can tell you with 100% certainty that threads that have descriptive titles average at least TWICE as many views as those that don't.
That is the MOST obvious and possibly the BEST reason to do it. And that is why we are requiring this.
So if you just title something:
"Damn!"
You will probably get only a fraction of the hits as you would by titling it
"Damn my parents!"
Can you see the difference? Just adding two words tells us a WHOLE lot about what to expect. (I can't believe I actually have to spell this out for people!)
This is a hard and fast rule of the Internet.
So if you don't bother to put the subject in the title, then you're really not that interested in getting responses, so why should we even host the thread and waste the forum space?
This goes for ANYTHING you do on the Internet, journal entries, email, webpages, etc.
It's common courtesy AND sensible.
BTW, I never could count all the threads titled "damn". And that is just one example.
well, "damn" does tell you that the thread will most likely be a rant
well, "damn" does tell you that the thread will most likely be a rant
Yes, but it doesn't distinguish between the 100 other "damn" threads floating about, now does it?
Yes, but it doesn't distinguish between the 100 other "damn" threads floating about, now does it?yeah but, individualism is getting pretty boring :p
Admit it, you people who can't be bothered to think of a decent title are just plain LAZY!
ihmurria
09-23-2006, 06:13 PM
Oi.
Well, will people at least be getting a warning or two about inappropriately titled threads before they're banned for repeat offences?
Here's my take on it though... a "damn" thread by me is guaranteed to be different than a "damn" thread by, say, hhb. And it'll attract different folks. Yes part of that is a little clique-y but, well, such is RT or YH.
I understand that it'd be nice to have really detailed thread titles, but then it would also be nice to tag our threads so that when folks search for something it'd link to that (other than exact words within the thread, subject headers or related terms). And I honestly don't think that it will have a noticeable impact on bandwidth, because a lot of us are just plain nosy and like poking into almost every thread we spot (particularly in RT).
Their warning will be in the form of deleted threads. It's already begun. The only way to save those threads is to get a sympathetic mod to retitle and undelete the thread.
ihmurria
09-27-2006, 08:13 AM
skip, with all due respect (none), you need to get a life. are you going to enforce proper grammar too?
yeah, you're probably gonna ban me, go ahead. thanks to you, these forums (which have been getting worse and worse as you have become more and more of an egotistical asshole) aren't really worth coming to anymore...congrats, you're a mini corporate fascist like the ones you pretend to hate. :)
skip is actually afraid of and/or hates free speech, so i suspect his raisins are up in his throat right about now....;)
:o oh my
indescribability
09-27-2006, 02:54 PM
Perhaps it could be made possible to change the title of your own threads in light of this new rule?
Perhaps it could be made possible to change the title of your own threads in light of this new rule?
Since it only applies to NEW postings it doesn't matter.
cerridwen
09-27-2006, 07:50 PM
I think it absolutely makes sense. Clear titles = easy to skim over.
Quick question: about this 'rated threads' business, since I think it might fall under the topic of this thread... It's almost never used, and when it is, it usually is someone who's rating it for the sake of rating it.... I remember going through RT forum and whoever did it just went through a slew of threads giving them all 5 stars, which was done, I assume, out of bordom.
Is the ratings on threads actually serve purpose or can this option be omitted? Just a thought.
I'd say the star ratings are about as useless as the karma system we had before.
It is useful in certain places like in the Journals. The high rated ones are definitely better reads.
HippyFreek
09-28-2006, 12:10 AM
I agree but disagree, Skip.
You're going to throw out free speech (even the free speech of saying nothing of importance, or even being vague) to teach netiquette?
Since when is it anyone's responsibility to teach anyone else netiquette?
I mean, it's fine that you want to make things easier to browse and such, but enforcing it as a RULE seems against the "free-speech" values of the HF...KWIM?
indescribability
09-28-2006, 03:54 AM
Do you have a way of making a sticky thread across all forums at the same time? Or would you have to do it in each forum, one by one?
I ask because while I think people should check here from time to time I realize that most do not, and I'm guessing this will be the cause of many complaints by those who are ignorant to the new rule.
I know it's their responsibility to keep up on these things, but I was thinking it may be less work to take the extra steps to notify than it would be to deal with all the complaints of those who are puzzled and question their deleted threads.
"I mean, it's fine that you want to make things easier to browse and such, but enforcing it as a RULE seems against the "free-speech" values of the HF...KWIM?"
How does providing a proper description when you start a thread impinge upon people's free speech. They can say whatever they want in the thread. You're just wasting my time with b.s.
Get real, and quit whining about nothing, or I'll just start banning people too.
From now on everytime I have to waste more time replying to this thread, I'll just ban whomever wasted my time. Permanently. I'm out of patience.
"I mean, it's fine that you want to make things easier to browse and such, but enforcing it as a RULE seems against the "free-speech" values of the HF...KWIM?"
How does providing a proper description when you start a thread impinge upon people's free speech. They can say whatever they want in the thread. You're just wasting my time with b.s.
Get real, and quit whining about nothing, or I'll just start banning people too.
From now on everytime I have to waste more time replying to this thread, I'll just ban whomever wasted my time. Permanently. I'm out of patience.Though I am kinda scared to continue on with this, since you didn't close the thread, I am assuming that you just don't want the same questions and whining, I have a legitimate point to raise, and question to ask...
I think most people's main problem with this, is not the lazy titles like "damn" (I actually agree with you in this sense)
but the more creative titles such as purposely misleading titles, or inside joke ones, etc. (see Young Hippies or Random Thoughts)
I think that most people would be fine with getting rid of the lazy titles, but the creative ones are what is causing problems
or would those types of threads fall under the "no value" rule to you?
If the title doesn't tell us what the thread is about, I don't care WHAT it's about, it will be deleted.
Gee can I be ANY clearer?
Maggie Sugar
09-28-2006, 03:28 PM
I just wanted to add this for clarity. Here's my take on it though... a "damn" thread by me is guaranteed to be different than a "damn" thread by, say, hhb. And it'll attract different folks. Please don't assume everyone on the site knows everyone else or their posting styles, the things they usually rant about ect. There are several thousand members and posters on Hip Forums. Your freinds may "know" a thread from you may be a certain way, but 99% of the other posters on the site have NO idea who you are, or what your posting style is.
It really isn't a big deal to do this. I've missed threads where I could have actually have been of help to people because a thread was titled "Oh, no." or "????" I uisually don't click on these because, too often, they are either incomprehensible, or just silly. When they are important, they may be missed by others, because most people just don't have the time to open every single thread and many people skip the stuff that seems not to be all that interesting. It benefits the OP to title appropriately. It isn't that hard, either. <shrug>
People must also realize that more than HALF the people who read their threads are NOT even members of this site, and only found their thread thru a search engine.
So if you don't give the thread a proper title, it WON'T be found, and you will lose half your potential audience for that post, some of whom would eventually become new members (and new friends of yours) if YOU posted up something interesting that they found due to a descriptive title of what they were looking for.
ihmurria
09-28-2006, 07:03 PM
People must also realize that more than HALF the people who read their threads are NOT even members of this site, and only found their thread thru a search engine.
So if you don't give the thread a proper title, it WON'T be found, and you will lose half your potential audience for that post, some of whom would eventually become new members (and new friends of yours) if YOU posted up something interesting that they found due to a descriptive title of what they were looking for.Not trying to be persnickity here, just trying to understand.
Your first post talks about reducing bandwidth by folks not clicking on every silly little title (despite the fact that a good portion make use of hte hovering tool to see what the first few words of a post are). And now you're saying appropriately titled threads will draw in more attention and new members which, um, wouldn't those -increase- bandwidth, not reduce it?
Again, not trying to waste your time, just trying to get a handle on the why of this move.
Maggie Sugar
09-28-2006, 07:23 PM
There is a difference between USING bandwidth (as in bringing in new people, and people reading posts and responding to them) and wasting bandwidth (as some useless threads do.) If your thread is good to be read, interesting, provacative, informative or just really, actually humorous, it ISN'T wasting bandwidth.
PsyGrunge
09-28-2006, 07:36 PM
it's good logic about titling your threads, thought that was a given, we must have some really strange characters posting in here.
There is a difference between USING bandwidth (as in bringing in new people, and people reading posts and responding to them) and wasting bandwidth (as some useless threads do.) If your thread is good to be read, interesting, provacative, informative or just really, actually humorous, it ISN'T wasting bandwidth.Exactly!
So if we don't see a proper title, we must assume the thread is not worth the bandwidth, and more importantly the wasted time of our members to click on it and determine it's worthless. If you can't spare the time to give a proper title, why should ANYONE spare the time to read it!
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.