Edit: ok you guys, it isn't sporting to only complain about titles—that's shooting birds in a barrel. Let's hear a better one!
On Tuesday in Redomond, VA, a programmer uncovered a unique software configuration that was being activated under very specific circumstances. This specific software configuration had never been seen before. The programmer then proceeded to simply erase the unique configuration from existence, removing any trace of it from the master codebase.
Locals in Redmond say that such configurations are rather common and call them "bugs".
It should, of course, read "A scientist's decision to kill a bird he'd been searching for for two decades". (I see the problem is in the original.) Alternatively, one could say "... seeking for two decades".
<pedantic grammar-nerd grin>
In this way, this article, which is trying to explain why the bird was killed, seems to recreate the problems that led to people being mad in the first place: giving the impression that this is a rare bird that no one had seen in 50 years and burying the fact that this isn't true. The majority of this article makes it seem like this was a bird that no one had seen in years when that simply isn't the case. It is just that no scientist had seen it in years. Big difference.