> [Item 5] The answer is yes, but the title is irritating in the same way: It gives the impression of a live debate when none exists. [...]
> [Item 6] The answer is immaterial. What’s irritating is when a title suggests a novel, interesting possibility that the article does not substantiate as worthy of attention.
In some cases there the question-mark primarily being used for deniability, and the "novelty" is secondary.
For example, when the author wishes to encourage an idea (e.g. "the pope isn't Catholic") but they also refuse to overtly endorse it and take sides, holding open a safe retreat "I was just asking questions".
> [Item 5] The answer is yes, but the title is irritating in the same way: It gives the impression of a live debate when none exists. [...]
> [Item 6] The answer is immaterial. What’s irritating is when a title suggests a novel, interesting possibility that the article does not substantiate as worthy of attention.
In some cases there the question-mark primarily being used for deniability, and the "novelty" is secondary.
For example, when the author wishes to encourage an idea (e.g. "the pope isn't Catholic") but they also refuse to overtly endorse it and take sides, holding open a safe retreat "I was just asking questions".