If I understand, the argument is that someone who doesn't want to be spoiled for endings should...look at a headline purported to be specifically about endings, and then read the article to see if it's about endings, which they are not going to do because there is an extraordinarily high chance it's exactly what it says it is in big letters, and any failure to voluntarily read spoilers they don't want to be spoiled for is then a failure on the part of the player?

That feels like reaching. Would rather not be mean. I think people stranded on top of zombie infested buildings whose only method of escape is a single in-use helicopter have reached less.

This is just a justification to brush off anyone who opens their mouth at all, because were there a reader who did for some reason want to click on every headline they didn't want to know about in order to make sure they shouldn't have clicked on it, that would definitely still be something that is their fault once they saw anything they shouldn't.

Even leaving aside why someone would do that, the OP made the conscious decision to post it like they did.

They could have tipped everyone off to the clickbait. They could have used a spoiler tag if they didn't bother reading it or wanted to play into the clickbait. They chose to do neither. That has nothing to do with the journalistic integrity of online gaming mags. This was a personal mistake.

I have seen communities be shockingly good about respecting this. The Hades community especially is amazing and, though the game has been out now for so many years the sequel is nearing completion, they'd probably still just give you what bare advice they have to based on your current status and tell you to keep playing because "trust me."

I don't know why the bg3 community wants to pretend it's impossible and out of their hands, while swearing it shouldn't matter anyway. It very well is, and for a game this stunning, it absolutely does.