• If I write a post and some people are able to get the core idea just from the title or a tweet-length summary, great!

• I can include the full contents of my posts in my RSS feed and on FB, because so what if people read the whole post there and never click though to my site?

It would be different if I funded my writing through ads (maximize time on site to maximize impressions) or subscriptions (get the chance to pitch, probably want to tease a paywall).

Sometimes I notice myself accidentally copying what makes sense for other writers. For example, because I can't put full-length posts on Bluesky or Mastodon I write short intros and link my full post. Yesterday I initially drafted:

It's common to flavor truffles with extracts, but I'd like less of a liquor flavor. This time last year I made some with freeze-dried raspberries, which I think came out well. I continue to like those a lot, and this year tried strawberry and orange zest. One worked a lot better than the other: [link]

This would have gotten more people to click through, but that shouldn't be my target. Instead I posted:

... and this year tried strawberry (eh) and orange zest (great!) [link]

No need to hold curiosity hostage.

It's common to criticize "clickbait", where a teaser entices and then doesn't deliver, but even reserving key information for the full article is a product of authors (needing to!) optimize for goals other than communicating to users. I like that this isn't a pressure that I'm under. Because our culture has so many who are under it, however, optimizing for communication can require noticing and intentionally avoiding common patterns.