Return to Answer

Well, I disagree that the author posted the question in good faith; at that point it's more like a "hostile witness".

IMHO, the title, as edited, did correctly express the intent of the post -- the author was frustrated that his personal shopping questions can't be asked on Super User and Server Fault -- and the author was actively trying to mask his intent by coming up with a really generic title for a subsequent question and pretending that wasn't the root cause of his frustration.

That said, since the author objected so strongly to the edit, I let it be.

Well, I disagree that the author posted the question in good faith; at that point it's more like a "hostile witness".

IMHO, the title, as edited, did correctly express the intent of the post -- the author was frustrated that his personal shopping questions can't be asked on Super User and Server Fault -- and the author was actively trying to mask his intent by coming up with a really generic title for a subsequent question and pretending that wasn't the root cause of his frustration.

That said, since the author objected so strongly to the edit, I let it be.

Well, I disagree that the author posted the question in good faith; at that point it's more like a "hostile witness".

IMHO, the title, as edited, did correctly express the intent of the post -- the author was frustrated that his personal shopping questions can't be asked on Super User and Server Fault -- and the author was actively trying to mask his intent by coming up with a really generic title for a subsequent question and pretending that wasn't the root cause of his frustration.

That said, since the author objected so strongly to the edit, I let it be.

Well, I disagree that the author posted the question in good faith; at that point it's more like a "hostile witness".

IMHO, the title, as edited, did correctly express the intent of the post -- the author was frustrated that his personal shopping questions can't be asked on Super User and Server Fault -- and the author was actively trying to mask his intent by coming up with a really generic title for a subsequent question and pretending that wasn't the root cause of his frustration.

That said, since the author objected so strongly to the edit, I let it be.

Well, I disagree that the author posted the question in good faith; at that point it's more like a "hostile witness".

IMHO, the title, as edited, did correctly express the intent of the post -- the author was frustrated that his personal shopping questions can't be asked on Super User and Server Fault -- and the author was actively trying to mask his intent by coming up with a really generic title for a subsequent question and pretending that wasn't the root cause of his frustration.

That said, since the author objected so strongly to the edit, I let it be.

Well, I disagree that the author posted the question in good faith; at that point it's more like a "hostile witness".

IMHO, the title, as edited, did correctly express the intent of the post -- the author was frustrated that his personal shopping questions can't be asked on Super User and Server Fault -- and the author was actively trying to mask his intent by coming up with a really generic title for a subsequent question and pretending that wasn't the root cause of his frustration.

That said, since the author objected so strongly to the edit, I let it be.