Thread Titles: A Primer

[Ronald Montesano]

It turns out that the GCA Subject field (aka Thread Title) holds 80 character spaces. Since the average English word has 5 or 6 letters in it, we can fit 11 average-sized words plus spaces in a thread title/subject (and have 3 or 4 spaces left.) While it's less than half of the words permitted in the recent Kavanaugh Khallenge, it certainly allows latitude in more than a hint at what your position/inquiry/accusation is all about. This is our handshake and it deserves proper attention.


Food for thought on a Monday evening without football.

[Joe Sponcia]

I just don't 'click', I guess for many the urge is too strong?

[BCrosby]

If someone starting a thread does not show the courtesy of indicating its theme in its title, I don't open it.


Bob

[John Kavanaugh]

"MY PREFERENCE would have been for accuser to Personal Message accused, rather than make an erroneous accusation in a public manner."

Ron Montesanto 2015 Photo Thread

[JLahrman]

If someone starting a thread does not show the courtesy of indicating its theme in its title, I don't open it.

Bob

+1. I'm not going to go down the list of threads, opening each one to determine if it's interesting or if I have something to add. If I can't tell what it's about from the title, I don't open it.

[Ronald Montesano]

"MY PREFERENCE would have been for accuser to Personal Message accused, rather than make an erroneous accusation in a public manner."

Ron Montesanto 2015 Photo Thread

How is this relevant to this thread, JuanKa?


There is no erroneous accusation in my opening post. There is no attack. It is a statement clearly supported by participants more revered than I.

[John Kavanaugh]

Ron,


This is a clear attack on Mucci, and erroneous because his thread titles are reinforced by the fact that he started them. When you see a Mucci thread you know it is about architecture just like when you see a Stephen King novel you know it is scary.


http://stephenking.com/library/novel/


Take a look at the above list of novels and wonder if they would be improved by longer titles. As a matter of fact, think about any movie or novel and tell me if you know the director do you need a longer title to pique your interest. I can't stand the modern long movie title that is a necessity out of a lack of creativity or continuation of a tired theme.


What is even worse than when you chose to lecture us on the photo thread, you felt you needed to start a completely new thread that has zero value.

[Carl Nichols]

Ron,


This is a clear attack on Mucci, and erroneous because his thread titles are reinforced by the fact that he started them. When you see a Mucci thread you know it is about architecture just like when you see a Stephen King novel you know it is scary.


http://stephenking.com/library/novel/


Take a look at the above list of novels and wonder if they would be improved by longer titles. As a matter of fact, think about any movie or novel and tell me if you know the director do you need a longer title to pique your interest. I can't stand the modern long movie title that is a necessity out of a lack of creativity or continuation of a tired theme.


What is even worse than when you chose to lecture us on the photo thread, you felt you needed to start a completely new thread that has zero value.

What are your top 3 Stephen King novels? 

[John Kavanaugh]

I've never read a Stephen King novel.

[Bill_McBride]

I've never read a Stephen King novel.

Best Stephen King title:  "It"

[Kalen Braley]

I hate to say it....

But JK is exactly right here.   Shorter titles can generate i².... interest and intrigue   

P.S.  I will disagree on one minor point though....Shawshank Redemption is not scary, if anything it's a "lifter-upper" kind of story!

[Joe Bausch]

Good thread titles help tremendously when searching the site.

[Joe Hancock]

Good thread titles help tremendously when searching the site.

Exactly. And, this isn't the movies. If you need to be lured into a topic, you may as well turn up the bass on your subwoofer for a little more bang to get your attention...if this was a trailer for a movie.

This has been addressed before, by Ran no less. Apparently it isn't going to be enforced, so live with it or withhold your clicks, as others have said.

[John Kavanaugh]

I hate to say it....

But JK is exactly right here.   Shorter titles can generate i².... interest and intrigue   

P.S.  I will disagree on one minor point though....Shawshank Redemption is not scary, if anything it's a "lifter-upper" kind of story!

Catching the wife sleeping with a golf pro sounds scary to me.

[Ronald Montesano]

John,


If I have an issue with any member of the board, I take it up via PM. This is a public service announcement (there's the value, mate) that does not contain any direct, personal attacks. I've never seen it mentioned how many characters the subject field holds (more value, so others don't have to count) and perhaps the knowledge that there are 80 characters available will instill a bit more professionalism in our thread-title choices. And, as JB notes above, having an accurate, thorough thread title helps the site when people search golf course architecture nuances on the interwebs.


When fellows (see above) indicate that they won't read one's thread if the title isn't descriptive enough, shouldn't that compel one to consider an alternative? I liken it to slow play. It's grating and egregious and so easily cured.


Kalen. I disagree.


Picayune as this detail is, it is important to me, so I'll mention it annually, hoping to convert some of the non-believers to the choir.

[John Kavanaugh]

Ron,


You wouldn't appear so dishonest if you would mention Mucci by name.

[Ronald Montesano]

And we're done.


Enjoy Fantasyland, where the tickets are always free.