# What's with all the deleted threads?



## Waygeek (May 3, 2020)

What's with all the threads that were just deleted? 'Shill posts'? Shilling for who? Xbox? Hawaii? Bethesda? Bezos?

And yet we have users posting threads like these, where every thread is a fucking baseless conspiracy thread https://gbatemp.net/threads/swedish...ting-long-pig-to-fight-climate-change.547578/ and he can post no problem?

I smell bullshit...


----------



## sarkwalvein (May 3, 2020)

I don't know what they mean by "Shill posts" but going by the title those threads look like yellow press clickbait BS, sensationalist as fuck. Good riddance.


----------



## Waygeek (May 3, 2020)

sarkwalvein said:


> look like yellow press clickbait



Uh... no? They're just news stories. 'Xbox SX will be on time' doesn't strike me as anything you just said. Have you not seen the thread in my OP?


----------



## sarkwalvein (May 3, 2020)

Waygeek said:


> Uh... no? They're just news stories. Have you not seen the thread in my OP?


I saw it, but it leaves me kind of puzzled.
The title is again just yellow press sensationalist BS clickbait. Like the others.
The actual content of the OP immediately goes off-topic, does a minimal connection to the title as in "I would do something else" and minimizes it into "unquestioned taboos" (a better suited but less clickbaity title), and then goes on to talk about toilet taboo. In other words, a yellow press sensationalist BS clickbait title that has nothing to do with the actual content.

PS: that one would also be a perfect candidate for deletion, and then good ridance.


----------



## Waygeek (May 3, 2020)

sarkwalvein said:


> The title is again just yellow press sensationalist BS clickbait. Like the others.



Interesting.

Please fix the titles so I can learn something. Because I'm seeing nothing wrong with them. I would like to learn how to not be 'sensationalist'.



sarkwalvein said:


> The actual content of the OP immediately goes off-topic



One of the posts has one reply (me, incidentally) and was very much on-topic.



sarkwalvein said:


> does a minimal connection to the title as in "I would do something else" and minimizes it into "unquestioned taboos" (a better suited but less clickbaity title), and then goes on to talk about toilet taboo.



The other posts in the thread are not really on OP tbh, if other posters within are insane the standard course of action is take action against them and if they've destroyed the thread sufficiently, either lock or clean up. I see it quite a bit here so... what's different about this case?



sarkwalvein said:


> I saw it, but it leaves me kind of puzzled.



Very interesting you have a stronger reaction to standard news stories than a thread which kicks off with LUL LIBRULS R CANNIBLZ.

Very interesting.


----------



## sarkwalvein (May 3, 2020)

Waygeek said:


> Please fix the titles so I can learn something. Because I'm seeing nothing wrong with them. I would like to learn how to not be 'sensationalist'.


Look, don't take it personal, I don't even know who wrote the title nor I am questioning your choice of titles, I am not suggesting _you_ need to learn how to write titles.

In general I won't take the job of fixing other people titles, too much pain, but a general idea is not to write a title just to get people into the article, and then the article being about something else.

I don't know what was the content of the deleted threads, so I can't comment about them regarding how off-topic they are, regarding the thread that still exsits I already commented, it makes a very weak link to the title (as to pretend the title is significant) but then it start talking about "unquestioned taboos": that should have been then the title (unless you wanted to bait people into an article with a misleading title).

Regarding why I think the other posts have sensationalist titles when I haven't read the corresponding articles, it is because the titles are written in a way to raise visceral emotions instead of trying to raise a rational response. It tries to make the reader avoid reason and instead tries to make him react without thinking.



Waygeek said:


> One of the posts has one reply (me, incidentally) and was very much on-topic.
> 
> The other posts in the thread are not really on OP tbh, if other posters within are insane the standard course of action is take action against them and if they've destroyed the thread sufficiently, either lock or clean up. I see it quite a bit here so... what's different about this case?


Well, your original post didn't give me any of this information, I only replied based on what you wrote. I couldn't have known this.



Waygeek said:


> One of the posts has one reply (me, incidentally) and was very much on-topic.
> Very interesting you have a stronger reaction to standard news stories than a thread which kicks off with LUL LIBRULS R CANNIBLZ.
> 
> Very interesting.


To be honest I think reading or replying to what some crazy person writes is a waste of time. It's the same as when you see all these chains of messages with misinformation in whatsapp, facebook or so. I identify their existence as a problem for society, but I see it a futile attempt to try myself to stop them, or to try making people notice that they are not doing themselves or anybody any good by just forwarding them without checking if they are real or thinking about them. It is bad, but I can't do anything about that but waste my time trying.


----------



## Waygeek (May 3, 2020)

sarkwalvein said:


> Look, don't take it personal, I don't even know who wrote the title nor I am questioning your choice of titles, I am not suggesting _you_ need to learn how to write titles.



But I am having the same issue as him. His titles are actually very economical looking to me, so I'm looking to learn. How would you fix them? There is no 'shock value' that I can see in them. They have the relevant proper nouns in the title and that's about it, very little personal interpretation.



sarkwalvein said:


> In general I won't take the job of fixing other people titles, too much pain



I mean you made the accusation so you should probably back it up.




sarkwalvein said:


> I don't know what was the content of the deleted threads



Yet you're very quick to judge this guy. All I can see is someone trying to partake in discussion on this forum.


----------



## sarkwalvein (May 3, 2020)

Waygeek said:


> But I am having the same issue as him. His titles are actually very economical looking to me, so I'm looking to learn. How would you fix them? There is no 'shock value' that I can see in them. They have the relevant proper nouns in the title and that's about it, very little personal interpretation.


Well, I tell you the truth. I would probably go poor if I was a journalist.
I believe shock value is something to be avoided. Something very bad for society.
If one is maximizing for shock value, other things that I consider relevant will be left behind.

I would try to reach for integrity and accuracy, not for shock value. That would probably make my titles boring, but I would believe they are correct from an ethical point of view when trying to inform others.

That said, I am not good at language. If I wanted to write an article for say a newspaper I would at least try get an editor. I am not a good person to get suggestions about how to make your writing better, I am not a good writer, not a writer at all actually.



Waygeek said:


> I mean you made the accusation so you should probably back it up.


I am not sure what accusation are you referring to.
Perhaps you mean I said the title is misleading, sensationalist, yellow-press style clickbait. Is it that?
Then I already backed it up: those titles "are written in a way to raise visceral emotions instead of trying to raise a rational response", that is the reason.



Waygeek said:


> Yet you're very quick to judge this guy. All I can see is someone trying to partake in discussion on this forum.


I only apply what I explained above. I have only my limited time, I have developed an heuristic (like everyone does) to keep me away from articles that I consider a waste of time, specially if they look like they are trying to generate flame (as in go for visceral emotional reactions instead of rational discussion).


----------



## Veho (May 3, 2020)

All these threads were just links to the same website, and were just a way to increase that website's exposure and ranking. The posts themselves offered little (or no) more information than what was in the title itself, ending with "read the rest at the following link", all linking to the same website. One of the titles had names of interest in quotation marks; asked why, the OP said it was for SEO purposes. The whole thing was blatant advertizing of a single website and is against the forum rules. 

If you're starting a news or discussion thread, compose an article or the opening argument in your own words, then cite sources.


----------



## Waygeek (May 3, 2020)

Veho said:


> All these threads were just links to the same website, and were just a way to increase that website's exposure and ranking.



Oh? Well that could be an answer to that. Can't check now though. What website? Strange to have a website reporting on games consoles and Hawaii together.

Better answer than 'yellow press' anyway, which just reads like some teen read that term recently as is using it for everything now haha.


----------



## sarkwalvein (May 3, 2020)

Waygeek said:


> Oh? Well that could be an answer to that. Can't check now though. What website? Strange to have a website reporting on games consoles and Hawaii together.
> 
> Better answer than 'yellow press' anyway, which just reads like some teen read that term recently as is using it for everything now haha.


You're really a shameful person.
Well, the world has all kind of people.


----------



## DinohScene (May 3, 2020)

Veho said:


> All these threads were just links to the same website, and were just a way to increase that website's exposure and ranking. The posts themselves offered little (or no) more information than what was in the title itself, ending with "read the rest at the following link", all linking to the same website. One of the titles had names of interest in quotation marks; asked why, the OP said it was for SEO purposes. The whole thing was blatant advertizing of a single website and is against the forum rules.
> 
> If you're starting a news or discussion thread, compose an article or the opening argument in your own words, then cite sources.



This.

Absolutely no need for concern.
If they where valuable threads, we wouldn't have deleted them.


----------

