IMO the title I used better reflected the author’s primary message … in his own words. It was TheGuardian which mis-directed it. Lemmy chose to run that blurb, I have no control over that (and when it does so, it’s often discouraging).
‘Self-termination’ was a stupid choice. I didn’t get a chance to see that or modify it when I clicked on ‘Preview’. Lemmy would be better if it would offer that choice and allow the poster to reject it. It’s rather authoritarian that way.
Changing the title of the article isn’t helpful
IMO the title I used better reflected the author’s primary message … in his own words. It was TheGuardian which mis-directed it. Lemmy chose to run that blurb, I have no control over that (and when it does so, it’s often discouraging).
‘Self-termination’ was a stupid choice. I didn’t get a chance to see that or modify it when I clicked on ‘Preview’. Lemmy would be better if it would offer that choice and allow the poster to reject it. It’s rather authoritarian that way.
~~Definitely a better fit for
[email protected] ~~
Edit: nevermind, its a quote from the author, not a creative reinterpretation by OP.