The strict requirement of using the exact title as the article was lifted a few months ago, but it doesn't mean that someone can editorialize freely the submission title. I think that the preferred alternative is one sentence of the subtitle / opening paragraph / abstract of the article.

In this case I can't find anything useful. I guess a correct alternative is to use the title of the previous submission to provide context so my proposal is

"Saving 25,000 Manual: It Is Done"

Anyway, the mods can disagree and change it back to the original, so YMMV.

(Note 1: They saved more than 25,000 :).)

(Note 2: I think your proposed title is good, but I tried to create one using cut&paste text from the article.)

> The strict requirement of using the exact title as the article was lifted a few months ago

The title thing seems to have caused confusion. dang has said that there hasn't been a change in policy (nor in the way the policy has been applied) and that the policy has always been "the original title is preferred except when it is misleading or linkbait."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8227198#up_8228566

But this meme of "you must only ever use the original title, even if it's terrible" is pretty strong.

I think people don't understand that HN seems to prefer titles that convey little meaning over titles that create kneejerk reactions. There are plenty of posts on HN from people who are responding to the title, and who haven't read the submitted article.

(EDIT: I think I upvoted you. I meant to. I might have accidentally downvoted, and I'm sorry if I did).

Perhaps if there were some semantic way for HN to link an article to a previous one, like threading. For example, a text field with previous HN item ID and a type drop-down with "duplicate"# and "follow-up" fields.

# For editors to reduce duplicate posts.