You are demonstrating, repeatedly, that you do not know how publishing works
None of this is true. If it was true you could explain how and why and you haven't explained any claim you made.
You display shock and anger
This never happened.
the notion that different people have different roles in which they do different work
You are hallucinating this as some sort of back peddle. It has nothing to do with anything.
Since you are a random angry shouty man
Seems like projection since all your posts are you getting upset instead of being able to back up anything you say.
I am not playing your childish game.
All you ever had to do was explain exactly why this isn't a purposely low information clickbait title and you can't. Instead you try to say there is nothing wrong, which you can't explain, and that it isn't your fault.
I think childish is making up hallucinations about things that don't matter and getting upset instead of giving evidence. I would think someone who "knows so much about publishing" would be able to explain themselves better than making the same claims with no evidence over and over. It's like you have never been challenged before and don't understand what's happening.
It is bad. Notice how you didn't give any reason that you can defend it, you just keep saying "nu uh", while also placing the blame on someone else.
It is bad because it contains no information on purpose, that's clickbait. Keeping as much information out of the title as possible.
The problem here is your lack of understanding,
If that were true you could explain it, but you haven't done any of that, you think you can just reply "No." without explanation.
your hostile confrontational attitude
Criticism with explanations and reasons behind it is not 'hostile and confrontational' just because you don't like it. This is projection, you getting upset over something you can't defend.
and in addition, apparently, poor reading comprehension.
Imagine calling someone 'hostile', then trying to just reply with variations of 'no, nope, nu uh' while flinging insults. The fact that you can't explain your opinion and for some reason think you don't have to while avoiding it with insults is very self righteous.
Er, what? So you Know it's bad and you take no responsibility.
I've been both a reporter and an editor, and in some roles, combined both. I have done paid writing for nearly 20 different publications in Britain, Europe, America, and Australia, starting in 1995. This is standard industry practice.
A person, their resume and a lot of irrelevant information.
So all the people who write financial software and avoid floats don't know what they're doing? That's would end up being just about everyone. You should teach them, you know so much more than they do.
I don't know why you're having a meltdown trying to defend clickbait. That's what's really bizarre.
The first sentence of an article isn't the title and the title is wasted, it's just manipulative clickbait, but some people are so in love with it they defend it like it's part of their identity.
That's like writing an article about a world cup game and titling it "some guys, a ball and a field".
The Register editor doesn't need that refresher course you're offering after all.
I think you're hallucinating things that were never said.
Since you mention it though, this is journalism 101 taught in middle school english. You don't need a where on the internet, but there is no who, what and why.
I don't have much influence over the headlines at all
So it's a bad low information title and you aren't defending it and know it's bad, or it's just fine to have a low information title? Seems like you're playing both sides here and not taking responsibility.
You feel you are being racially oppressed for being white by a language model that people use to generate javascript and your evidence is a white supremacy blog, so I think it might be a little self righteous to call other people trolls.