Does every question mark deserve a Betteridge?

To blog is to get dunked on. I accept this. I even sometimes wonder if I should be grateful, as I suspect my willingness to get dunked on may represent a kind of comparative advantage. (You can tell yourself that if you try to placate the haters, you’ll just ruin things for people who like you. But how do you feel when you’re staring down barrel of a 127 comment thread full of people debating how it’s possible that you’re such an idiot?) Still, there’s one particular species of dunking that puzzles me. For context, Betteridge’s law states:1 Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no. This is often employed as a sick burn. As in, “You titled your article ‘Is this the world’s first gay caveman?’ because it’s *not the world’s first caveman but you wanted it to be, because you want attention, you are so bad, har-har.” But I don’t quite understand the rules. Can someone explain the rules? Question 1: Are question marks in titles always bad? I’m just checking.…