Win / GreatAwakening
GreatAwakening
Sign In
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Reason: None provided.

"Creating catchy titles," is not necessarily the path to the Truth, in fact it has been a primary method of keeping us away from it. I'm not saying there is no merit in your request, but most of the really good evidence I have found does not have an interesting title on it. In fact, most of it looks something like,

"Report No. 2290, 71st Congress, 3rd Session."

That hardly rolls off the tongue.

I appreciate the need to give context, and explain why a piece of information is useful. The other request for that purpose that is currently sticked is very reasonable, putting the burden of easing research on the presenter. If I present something I strive to make sure I present the evidence in a way that people will understand what is being presented and can find it easily, without having to do the hours (or days, or months) of research it took me to find it. Easing that burden on the reader is essential to bring about the "Gestalt of Many Minds" in research.

But this request is less reasonable. It suggests that the burden of presenting the evidence is on the ability of the researcher to advertise. Again, I'm not saying there is no merit to that request, but the entire burden can't be placed there. Some of the burden must remain with the entire society, to look, even when the title isn't super catchy.

I look at anything that even remotely resembles something I am interested in. It doesn't have to be catchy, just topical. Some of the best pieces of research on this board have been "not popular" because of not the best titles. I suggest it is good investigative procedure to look at things, even if the title isn't thrilling. See what is presented, and how it is presented if the topic is interesting at all. I don't rely on headlines, but on topics and the content. It has lead me to some very interesting pieces of information.

1 year ago
3 score
Reason: Original

"Creating catchy titles," is not necessarily the path to the Truth, in fact it has been a primary method of keeping us away from it. I'm not saying there is no merit in your request, but most of the really good evidence I have found does not have an interesting title on it. In fact, most of it looks something like,

"Report No. 2290, 71st Congress, 3rd Session."

That hardly rolls off the tongue.

I appreciate the need to give context, and explain why a piece of information is useful. The other request for that purpose that is currently sticked is very reasonable, putting the burden of easing research on the presenter. If I present something I strive to make sure I present the evidence in a way that people will understand what is being presented and can find it easily, without having to do the hours (or days, or months) of research it took me to find it. Easing that burden on the reader is essential to bring about the "Gestalt of Many Minds" in research.

But this request is less reasonable. It suggests that the burden of presenting the evidence is on the ability of the researcher to advertise. Again, I'm not saying there is no merit to that request, but the entire burden can't be placed there. Some of the burden must remain with the entire society, to look, even when the title isn't super catchy.

I look at anything that even remotely resembles something I am interested in. It doesn't have to be catchy, just topical. Some of the best pieces of research on this board have been "not popular" because of not the best titles. We should look at things, even if the title isn't thrilling. See what is presented, and how it is presented if the topic is interesting at all. I don't rely on headlines, but on topics and the content. It has lead me to some very interesting pieces of information.

1 year ago
1 score