Link, the reason it was posted and what is the outcome you’re expecting by posting. That should start the conversation while avoiding that click-baitish feeling.

Not even a single-sentence description? I’m against. No way I’m clicking a mystery link to see what’s at the end of it. That’s how you get on a list.

Please add some description.

I like when the body has a summary of the contents behind the link, or even a personal opinion of OP on the topic or how they found the link etc.

It’s still each users choice if they want to read it or go straight to the link.

IMO that’s an advantage over the alien site.

I think a post body should usually be empty if it’s a link, or at most should provide a summary or key points.

If you as the OP want to editorialise or provide your opinion on the article, do that in a top-level comment. And most of the time, you should do that. If you’re posting it, you probably have an opinion, so get the conversation started by sharing it!

I find them very annoying, especially the ones that include “a discussion on hacker news”, I’m here because I want to have a discussion here. Unless the link is a video, song, picture, etc. This is mainly regarding news stuff.

I don’t think anyone gets to decide what a person “Should” be doing, who are these “should-ers” that get to make these decisions?

It’s like putting a dead cow in a museum and calling it art. SHOULD it be art just because it’s there? Or SHOULD there be some explanation or clue as to what the “artist” who put the cow there is trying to say? It’s something I’ve thought about in relation to what constitutes art, and what doesn’t.

My point here is just that in my view, it’s helpful to have some more input rather than just a link when it’s not apparent why the link matters or might be significant.