When proposed node titles miss the mark

The scenario: some poor newbie posts to SoPW with a useless node title ("Newbie needs help", etc), then some well-intentioned monk diligently clicks the consideration button but seems to fall short of proposing a good title.

If another monk comes along later, sees that the node needs a new title, sees that it has been considered with a request for a new title, but feels the proposed title isn't right, what is the best course of action? Vote to keep the node as-is (reject the consideration rather than change the title to something that still isn't very good)?

I'm asking after seeing a node originally called just "hexadecimal" -- which is admittedly pretty meaningless -- with a consideration that offers the title "How to open a file in hexadecimal form?" -- which IMHO is not much better (no blame on the considerer: the OP's question was too vague to put a reasonable handle on it; really, "hexadecimal" is just about as good as any).

I voted to keep the title as-is, but the principle of the thing gave me pause. I can imagine wanting to propose a different title to improve on someone else's node consideration, but I don't see any way to do that.

Comment on When proposed node titles miss the mark

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: When proposed node titles miss the mark by jdporter (Paladin) on May 12, 2005 at 03:40 UTC
Well, in this case, the proposed title was extracted almost verbatim from the beginning of the post. I agree, it's not a good question... but if we changed it to be entirely accurate as to what the OP is really asking, we might be accused of too much interference. (E.g., in this case, we know s/he doesn't want to open the file in "hexadecimal" mode, but in binary mode. Or maybe we don't...) But I've wondered about this on many occasions. Wouldn't it be nice if there were a "consideration discussion forum" (wiki, perhaps?) where all the issues could be thrashed about before a janitor takes action?	[reply]
Re: When proposed node titles miss the mark by holli (Abbot) on May 12, 2005 at 12:52 UTC
Yeah, I often wished I could write and post comment to a consideration. Maybe we can have threaded considerations? holli, /regexed monk/	[reply]
Re: When proposed node titles miss the mark by ww (Archbishop) on May 12, 2005 at 14:07 UTC
Agree strongly with holli -- but without having ANY clue how much work that would be to implement. OTOH, have been admonished by tye thusly: "if you can't decide exactly what should be done, then let someone else consider." ... which seems wise counsel, given the possible difficulty of implementing a comment scheme. It does, however, require us to (1, and less important) Have faith the many other monks likely scanning the post may have a better idea for re-titling (or other fixes) that we do at the particular moment (2) see if re-factoring our spur-of-the-moment recommendation might improve clarity and precision	[reply]
Re: When proposed node titles miss the mark by mrborisguy (Hermit) on May 12, 2005 at 14:15 UTC
just to add a opposite view... wouldn't it be harder for the op to decide what the new title should be if he gets 3 or 4 different suggestions for a new title?	[reply]
Re^2: When proposed node titles miss the mark by cbrandtbuffalo (Deacon) on May 12, 2005 at 15:34 UTC
This is a good point, so I think the implementation would allow monks to consider one or more suggested titles, then the one with the most votes is suggested. This way someone who spent more time grokking a post can suggest a better title, but ultimately the OP gets only one suggested new title.	[reply]
Re^2: When proposed node titles miss the mark by Arunbear (Prior) on May 15, 2005 at 19:58 UTC
Typically each node in the thread will need to be retitled, that's why retitling is best left to the janitors (who are usually wise enough to perceive the true value of a suggested title).	[reply]
Re: When good considerations go bad by Anonymous Monk on May 12, 2005 at 15:54 UTC
Well, we could propose a system of meta-janitors which could offer considerations of considerations and keep the janitors in check. And then we'd want a moderation system setup, so that we could keep track of who does the best job of providing meta-considerations. And I'd also like to see the XP concept extended, so that we could ++ or -- considerations and meta-considerations. Either that, or we could just take a deep breath and stop being concerned about other peoples node titles.	[reply]
Re: When proposed node titles miss the mark by Arunbear (Prior) on May 15, 2005 at 19:30 UTC
I can imagine wanting to propose a different title to improve on someone else's node consideration, but I don't see any way to do that. Just /msg janitors with your suggestion for the new title.	[reply]
Re: When proposed node titles miss the mark by TedPride (Priest) on May 13, 2005 at 01:23 UTC
I never read the titles anyway. The content is far more important.	[reply]
Re^2: When proposed node titles miss the mark by herveus (Prior) on May 13, 2005 at 11:49 UTC
Howdy! I hope that was tongue in cheek, but I missed the smiley... :-) Seriously, while the content is what is important, without useful titles, one is reduced to reading every note to discover the content of interest. I rely on the titles to decide which notes to read, as I don't have the time nor the inclination to read everything. yours, Michael	[reply]