I'm strongly against this. The SuperCollider MultiDropdown is already used for too much stuff and is already suffering from website-in-a-website syndrome, and cramming more information into it just makes an already-noisy place even more noisier.
Let's say you implement this change on the grounds that a title doesn't say enough about a question to determine whether one should click through. You and Yannis's answer both call out Gaming.SE's questions being the impetus for this feature, but you admit Gaming.SE has its own problems with tags. So what happens when the tags don't tell enough of a story, either?
It seems the next logical step is to include an excerpt! Surely the combination of title, site name, tags, and excerpt will give enough of a picture. Now we have a replica of the main Stack Exchange site except in a 460 × 220 pixel box. How convenient! What other websites can we shove into a tiny box?
The SuperCollider MultiDropdown is only useful insofar as it's a quick—not comprehensive—glance at data: you get just enough of a taste of content to entice you to click through. If you're going to the Hot Questions list there, you're already predisposed to blindly clicking on links that seem interesting and it's fulfilled its purpose: to get you to check out other sites on the network.
In reality, I think this feature request ignores the real problem: bad or misleading titles. Bad titles are bad everywhere: whether they appear in the SuperCollider MultiDropdown, on Stack Exchange's website, or on the specific Stack Exchange site on which they were asked.
If a title is misleading or unclear, it really should be edited and improved. And if that happens, the problem goes away.
There was a contention that maybe you don't know enough about the site to suggest an edit, but I don't buy that. Consider the workflow:
- You know that the SuperCollider MultiDropdown is clickable and contains the Hot Questions list.
- You browse through the list and see a title that interests you, knowing that it appears in the context of a specific site.
- You click through and understand the question enough to be annoyed/disappointed that you wasted n seconds clicking through to something about a question you don't like.
If you're already invested in clicking through to the question and know enough about the subject matter to react to it being a misleading or bad title, you have both the means and the ability to suggest a better title that helps everyone in every context, including the SuperCollider MultiDropdown.