Thread Titles

[carpro]

As can we all friend, as can we all ... and that begins by reading on all sides of an issue.

Like I said, I did put in my own title once and was jumped on, screamed at and told not to do so again.

By the way, did you read the piece? If not you should as it does say some nice things about GB

Of course I didn't read it.

The title told me it was a piece of trash.

A less spiteful title was in order if the author really wants to draw readers other than Bush haters.

I remember several of your titles that were not only misleading, but outright lies.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Of course I didn't read it.

The title told me it was a piece of trash.

A less spiteful title was in order if the author really wants to draw readers other than Bush haters.

I remember several of your titles that were not only misleading, but outright lies.

If you did not read the article, then I gently suggest you have no idea of what you are talking about as you have no real idea of what was written in the article. Titles in magazine articles are often written to catch the eye and do not always show what slant the article really has. This article had both negative and positive things to say about Bush.

Now, as I have only entered one thread title as mine you will have to argue with the authors or title writers about the truth or falseness of the title. For instance the title of the book, To Kill a Mockingbird is not about killing birds.

Have a blessed day.

 

[carpro]

If you did not read the article, then I gently suggest you have no idea of what you are talking about as you have no real idea of what was written in the article.

We're talking about titles, aren't we?

The contents of the article don't matter. That are not the subject of the thread. Titles and how to use them is.

You should know.

Shouldn't you?:BangHead:

If you want to talk about the contents of the article, start a thread to deal with that subject. Then, if I want to participate, I'll read the article. Although I suspect the only reason you posted it was that the title appealed to you.

 

[OldRegular]

I chuckled at the truth of your statement. You are a wise fellow. Thanks.

So did I!!!!

 

[windcatcher]

Titles serve different purposes and people for different reasons:

Generally, a title doesn't draw my interest (the primary purpose of a title is to draw interest), unless it discloses some cue to the content. That said..... on some forums such as this..... the opening sentences are also a preview of content when scanning the list with the mouse. If the poster has used the lick of sense God gave him in starting his post.... often some 'grab-ya' is in that first line if the title isn't enough to do it.

I copy titles when they seem balanced with the content of an article.....or when I get lazy: I usually change titles if the title presents a different message from the content, so that its misleading. Regardless.... the poster is responsible for choosing the title of his/her post. After that..... opinions are opinions and anyone thinking the title is unfair or slanted has their right.

CTB, btw, if recalled correctly, a snippet quote was posted. It, too, supported the title and did not present that the article carried any balance content. What we choose to quote also says something about the impression we desire to leave the drive by glancer....whether we recognize balance or prefer a slant based on our own opinionated preferences.