New rule

[mmcirvin]

For stories about the desirability of a given action, headlines and titles of the form "To [foo] or not to [foo]? That is the question" are hereby banned.

Comments

[spatch]

I heartily endorse this product, service, and/or concept.

[prog.livejournal.com]

What's far worse to me is "The $foo's the thing." Dude, that's not even the whole original sentence, even when $foo eq "play".

[sunburn.livejournal.com]

How about, "Let's kill all the [fooers]!"

[antikythera.livejournal.com]

After four hundred years of it? Not gonna happen. ;)

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

We stand bravely athwart the rails of 400-year-old cliche yelling "Stop!"

Or is that a cliche too?

[antikythera.livejournal.com]

Not as much of a cliche, because there were no rails 400 years ago. :D

What,

[vardissakheli.livejournal.com]

with my [foo] in your [bar]?

[ultraman.livejournal.com]

Can exceptions be made when the 'foo' in question rhymes with "be" such as "To key or not to key?" or some sort of sailing article titled "To lee or not to lee?"

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

NO

[mmcirvin.livejournal.com]

..."TV or not TV" is SUPER TRIPLE BANNED.

[ultraman.livejournal.com]

What if, instead of being about doing foo or not doing foo, its about how to determine the appropriate object of a toast, so like, you're writing for architectural criticism monthly, and discussing the sorts of toasts appropriate at conferences so you title the article "To Mies or not To Mies?"

[urbeatle.livejournal.com]

So you are also banning "Tofu or not Tofu" as a slogan for an artificial meat product?