[NeveHanter]

The more popular HN gets the more clickbait-y, attention-seeking and polarising titles and articles we're getting. I also think the more popular it is the less weight each down-vote/flag has, we will see more and more of such content being posted.

I and most of the people I know or work with really don't care whether something is/was made by a man or a woman. IMO that's totally unnecessary part of the title and its some kind of the usual "clickbait" you see in the news titles everywhere.

BTW: I was used to seeing "one-man" being used everywhere regardless whether the person in context was a man or a woman and only today I've discovered that both one-woman and one-person are valid by couple of UK/US dictionaries (even the older ones). Maybe that's one of the reason why some non-native speakers see this as an clickbait/attention seeking.

[pvg]

This isn't a clickbaity, attention-seeking or polarizing title, it's a completely generic title that happens to generate a lot of confected umbrage. The problem is the confected umbrage, not the title which is why the article is where it is (on the HN front page) and the umbrage is where it is (shoved out of the way in comment jail).

[ternnoburn]

The thing is, I don't think it's click bait in this case. One person running a large service is notable, appropriate content for HN. And she's a woman, so one woman is per reasonable, factual, non editorializing headline given that "one woman" is a descriptor that's been in widespread use for some time.

People seem to be reacting to it like it's poison.