1. 7

I feel like this has come out of nowhere but shown up a lot recently. Weird.

  1.  

  2. 17

    Because after 7 ate 9, all the other numbers are too afraid to show up.

    1. 6

      I laughed purely because I never would expect a joke like this on a tech news aggregator.

    2. 11

      As I’m reading this on the “recent” page, there’s a “7 blah blah” right below yours. What a coincidence.

      My guess? 7 is an odd number, and that gets attention easier. 10 is expected. 5 is too short. 7 is perfect.

      HN has this to say about lists:

      If the original title begins with a number or number + gratuitous adjective, we’d appreciate it if you’d crop it. E.g. translate “10 Ways To Do X” to “How To Do X,” and “14 Amazing Ys” to “Ys.” Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. “The 5 Platonic Solids.”

      On that, I agree with Paul Graham. A list isn’t inherently bad; sometimes you can get some good stuff. But calling out the number of the list in the headline is attention-bating. “7 Ways to Hire Programmers” is catchier than “How to hire programmers”, but honestly, the number doesn’t mean anything more than “One simple trick” or “doctors hate her!”.

      1. 6
        1. 6

          I dislike the ironic re-appropriation of Buzzfeed-isms because it desensitizes the audience over time into accepting them.

          Disclaimer: I’m not known for my fun quotient.

          1. 2

            Silently deletes working title of next blog post

            1. 1

              I wonder how possible it would be to create an automatic title rewriter following HN’s rules. It’s easy enough to create a blacklist filter if an article’s title matches a Buzzfeed-ism, but that’s very good content being removed simply for having an attention-bait title.