Most of the time, it's a good thing, but in cases like this is where this falls over.
(You can also see this in the other direction parent comment, for what it's worth, "Jack Dorsey's New Twitter" isn't really accurate, as far as I'm concerned. It is more informative overall, though.)
I am routinely down-modded and even banned for merely asking for more-descriptive titles. It's anti-user, anti-community, anti-usefulness, and douchey.
All we needed here was, at least, "Bluesky Social allows domain hijacking" or whatever it's actually doing (which I don't have a grasp of, even after following the cryptic link).
Or even just "This guy is now all of S3 on Bluesky Social." But that wouldn't be as click-baity, would it?
Absolutely. I'm not saying that I think that the title here is good. Just that I understand why it ended up as the title.
> I don't know how this "discouragement" is phrased,
You can find the guidelines here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
To quote the relevant part:
> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
That's it.
> (which I don't have a grasp of, even after following the cryptic link)
I described it over here, if you're still curious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35820670