We can only hope.
So getting asked to “please” do something, with an explanation of why, and no warning, is getting “dinged” now, is it?
My tone here is all rolleyes, if you’re wondering.
Please read more carefully. I didn’t say I was dinged. I suggested that the policy should be to “ding” someone if they post an actual NSFW thread, rather than change a thread title because some people might incorrectly ASSUME it contains NSFW links.
So we have two possible scenarios: the one that happened here, that contained no ding but does contain a change to a thread title; or, leaving the thread title as is, and whoever doesn’t want to read it doesn’t have to.
These things should be allowed to police themselves, as long as there no actual NSFW links, or whatever. If the thread title is too vague for too many people, the thread will slip off the bottom edge of the page very quickly. See? Self-policing, no need for moderator intervention.
Please write more carefully. Many people would think that this
implied that you thought you’d just been dinged. Obviously I am glad of the clarification.
And I, for one, am content to encourage your threads to slip off the bottom edge of the page.
I found “WANT: Shining Clock” more misleading. I thought you were talking about a lighted clock of some sort.
I would have clicked on “WANT” out of curiosity – given who was posting.
And “WANTED” probably would have been very clear and maybe encouraged others to post their own hankerings.
I’m old and I think WANT was clear enough. It’s not really our responsibility to entice dopers with our titles – just to convey what the threads are about.
Well, that was largely my reasoning. “WANT” is like a present you have to unwrap; the surprise is part of the fun. “Cuckoo clock with scene from the The Shining” is no fun at all, and renders the post itself anticlimactic.
I’ve done several of these. I’d assumed it was clear to most people that “WANT” as a thread title translates to, “Here’s a very cool gadget that I wish I owned.”
If someone doesn’t want to open it because they assume it’s a rickroll, or NSFW, or this, well I see that as their prerogative. Their loss, as it were.
I think that as long as the link is NOT NSFW, it should be allowed.
wrong thread.
Don’t want.
I thought it was going to be the clock as described in the book: a mechanical wind-up clock that on the stroke of the hour has a male and female dancer come out and arms go around each other & they dance then separate… on second go-around the male dancer flips the female upside down and buries his head beneath her skirt while she buries her face in his trousers.
“Eww”, thinks 5 year old Danny, “they’re kissing pee-pees!”
I wonder if such a clock would only do the second bit on the 6 and 9.
A lissener clock:
I’m thinking a good theme clock would be where lissener pops his head out at certain times when a chime sounds as he asks, “What time is it?”
When he pops his head out, he’s perched right next to a clock, but he asks anyway.
.
Me too.
Listen, people: “The” in titles is NOT OPTIONAL. It’s part of the name! The movie is called “THE Shining”. Calling it “Shining” is like calling Robert “Bob” without asking if that’s OK first. It’s rude, and in this case, misleading.