I agree, if the people voting the article up are dimwits who vote things up without reading them. You're smart. You wouldn't have voted it up. But clearly a bunch of dimwits did - it's a sign of bad voting rather than bad submission. The voting system is meant to weed out bad submissions.
Well, actually the article isn't a bad one. It's just misappropriately titled. That's why I would like a special flag so a mod could fix it, though I guess maybe that's too infrequent to warrant a feature.
I disagree. This is a very good change. The real title ("snagging smartphones") isn't good. In fact, it's almost entirely meaningless, and has nothing else going for it other than alliteration. This one is better.
Regarding frequency, I actually think this happens pretty often. However, I think each time is a judgement call, and we have a flag link already. After all, if we were not meant to editorialize from time to time, Paul Graham could have the yc news script take the title of the web site.
Not necessarily. A lot of sites don't put the article title in the html title unfortunately. Most do, but enough don't that you have to have that feature there.
Also, lots of them put extraneous crap after it, like the website's name and some descriptive text.
I feel like flag is the nuclear option, when what's called for here is a surgical strike. I probably think too much about this stuff though.
