That's a fair point. I enjoy being a _bit_ provocative, but that title might have been a bit much.

Yes, it's fairly straightforward - if a title is too baity, we edit it, in keeping with this guideline:

"Please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

However, when we do that, we always try to find a representative phrase within the article itself. We try not to make up our own wording but rather to let the article speak for itself. In this case, we found this sentence:

> Microsoft is very obviously employing dark patterns in order to goad its users into paying for Onedrive storage

However, since that's also a provocative claim, we added a question mark at the end. This is also a standard moderation edit; it's basically shorthand for "the article argues for controversial claim X, but whether that's true or not is something each reader can decide for themselves". In this way the title that appears on the frontpage becomes more neutral, which is what we're going for.

What? The question mark alone gives "I'm Ron Burgundy?" vibes. In what universe is it more informative? You absolutely do not need to go to bat for the HN mods here lmfao. Literally nobody is asking you to.

> Not saying that's what happened here

You are literally saying that. So say it with your full chest! Don't choose now to be a coward.

Okeydokey, then.

The question mark is pretty bad though.