• empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Rule 4 definitely shouldn’t be rescinded, there would be way too much editorializing of titles to fit the posters narrative (because let’s be real, >50% of users don’t open the article, at least not at first). It definitely needs to stay in a true news community.

    A timestamped archive version would be nice but you then end up taking away direct traffic from legitimate websites- the same problem as the AMP link I unfortunately had to use above. No traffic, no survival. (Granted I will happily post an archive link when content is paywalled; but most other sites do still need that traffic.)

    your options 3 and 4 could work fine- 3 just seems like spam and you’ll get people hating it like the MBFC bot, and 4 already partially exists- in the form of the link tagline that appears under the post when you actually open it. Warning users about noncompliance and letting them decide if they care enough to change it or not is probably fine enough for now.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I just feel like forcing people to babysit their posts when it isn’t their fault that the news outlet changed the title out from under them might discourage posting.

      • Ersatz86@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The preceding discourse was civilized and adult, and I am a better person for having witnessed it. Well done all.