Vaguely entitled threads with only a link as o.p.

[Mike Reed]

Maybe it's me, but recently I've opened threads wondering what it's all about, just to be confronted with a link; usually to a newspaper article or similar. Frankly, I can rarely be bothered to go further as I don't have sufficient levels of curiosity.

If and when I do, it frequently turns out to be a limited appeal (often political) subject of no interest to me at all. Why can't the subject matter be described in the title, however briefly? There have been one or two references to this situation, I've noticed, but thought it timely to bring this to wider attention.

Doesn't happen often, but annoying when it does i.m.o.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

I'm not particularly bothered about a vague, or even clickbaity thread title, provided some sort of executive summary of the linked material is given in the OP. That way I can decide whether to follow the link or not.

 

[JensenHealey]

Some people like to throw hand grenades as a conversation starter. Typically you hear little from the OP afterwards too, I feel.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Some people like to throw hand grenades as a conversation starter. Typically you hear little from the OP afterwards too, I feel.

It's a bit like the forum equivalent of arson. You know the arsonist is lurking round a nearby corner, watching the aftermath of their work.

 

[Tony L]

Agree with this. I’ll maybe start deleting threads without actual OP content.

 

[awkwardbydesign]

And make that info a sticky?

 

[Big Tabs]

Yes - I find it irritating to find a potentially spurious link with no indication of topic or content.
It happens so frequently that I thought it was the way to do things on forums (forum naive)
Glad it isn’t just me who ignores them. Reassuring.

 

[Tony Lockhart]

And make that info a sticky?

Or put the warning somewhere that few members look, maybe with the rules on the classifieds?

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Or put the warning somewhere that few members look, maybe with the rules on the classifieds?

And then start a thread with an inscrutible title, with nothing but a link to the new rule in the OP.

 

[Woodface]

I very rarely follow the links, rather tiresome. It’s all some seem to do.

 

[Mike Reed]

Quite a chain reaction to this thread; pleasantly surprised.

 

[TheDecameron]

Quite a chain reaction to this thread; pleasantly surprised.

O.K you asked for it,

 

[Snufkin]

O.K you asked for it,

I had forgoten that song. When I think of Chain Reaction, it is this that comes to mind:

 

[Mike Reed]

O.K you asked for it,

Both versions sound the same to me but I'm not familiar with that song or its title. However, Dec, your version is obv. the all-singin' 'n' dancin' one to me.