Three foods seem more manageable and easier to think about. I’d prefer that product and idea.

I find option A to be more appealing because I think that it is a more interesting and attention-grabbing headline. I also like that it is shorter and more concise, which increases the odds that I would bother to read it in the first place. I think that having an adjective like "wacky" within the first three words of the headline makes it more interesting and attention-grabbing.

I prefer option A because it is short and to the point

I chose A because it says that I "should" bring these on every hike. It seems more knowledgeable and information I need to know.

Both are equally horrid as it doesnt really convey emergency kit seriousness. A is better because its shorter

It is more relatable to me because I do not eat a full meal on the trail and a snack is better

While the other choice is more informative, I know I skip over emails with a long subject. I am choosing A just because it's shorter. I would prefer it be short and informative, so I am not sold on Option A, just, again, it's shorter. Long titles tend to be spam or scams.

I think the shorter description would lure more people. It only takes one good camp or hike and you learn what you need and don't need to take.

Definitely Option A because it is short and to the point. Thank you.

Option A is more appealing because it focuses in the product being described

The wacky foods part makes it interesting

I think A is more catchy as well as more succinct. B is a labor to read.

This one is more attention grabbing. I want to know what the 3 wacky snacks are.

just quicker and more to the point, feels less like a buzzfeed article

While both these options are good, I selected the shorter one. It gets the message across, ad does not take as long to read.

I would be more inclined to click on A because I am very different from the norm, I would want wacky.

It's simple but intersting enough to click. Not too long.

It's shorter and easier to digest. I'm more likely to look at this list.

Option B is too wordy.

Option A is shorter and more to the point, it also engages curiosity better.

I like shorter messages like this so I would pick A.

A peaks my interest in learning about a 3 way snack food.B sounds survivalist's and odd

The title for "The 3 wacky snack foods you should bring on every hike" is more fun. This is a nice feel and think it'll work well for selling this to hikers. Seems awesome to me and one that is worthwhile to read and find out about. The SafeTrail Kits must be different.

The other one is too long, I would scroll by without reading

Option A seems straight forward to the point and seems the most attention grabbing which makes me the most likely to click

I think the statement of A is too boring. B sounds more appealing with the rhetorical questions and emphasizes emergency kits, which is an important feature

This seems more practical. It sounds like something I would be more likely to try. The other one just makes it seem like something weird to try

I like B better because "wacky" is not a term that seems appetizing to me.

I feel like option B better matches how I feel about trail foods.

I think B is better- It's more expressive and dones a better job explaining it.

The first option just sounds like click bait, and I ignore that generally. Option B sounds better because it gives me a little more information about the product, and I am more likely to read it and consider clicking on it.

don't like the tone of A, also what is wacky snack!? B is much more professional.

I prefer the headline shown in choice B, I don not want to consume ANY type of"wacky snacks", that headline just does not appeal to me at all.

I prefer this option. I believe most would agree they would welcome a change to a fresh idea trail food from whatever they normally eat. This name brings the change to mind by the power of suggestion.

I would prefer B because it makes the snacks sound more serious and like there is a chance I might like them instead of calling the wacky.

I like the recognition that trail foods are often the same thing. It makes me think about it and want different ideas which is why B is my top choice. I also prefer offbeat to wacky. Wacky makes me think there's something really odd about the options, while offbeat just makes me think it's a bit different.

I think that option B sounds more professional and trustworthy. I would be interested in learning more

Other option seemed like a joke this option shows what I am trying to figureo ut in a nice caption so I know I want to read on

B because it is more descriptive overall and gives more details of the product compared to A.

I thought the phrasing in B was more appealing than that of A.

I like option B better, because it is more descriptive and down to earth. I dislike the word wacky in the other option. That turns me off immediately.

It sounds more safe and I don't really want something that is "wacky" to eat. I want it to be fun sure, but wacky sounds like it might caught me problems later.

B was more intriguing and used better language. I didn't like the word wacky in choice A. It didn't sound appealing.

I would take Option B a lot more seriously. Option A's description of "wacky snack foods" is very unappealing.

I feel like it makes you visualize the scenario, then seeing other options. Making it more appealing to me.

Option B. This option brings to mind hiking snacks that will be nutritious, energy giving, and tasty.

The longer description to me is better because it states what the product is, what it's used for and who produces it. Option "A" is too vague.

i like the headline in option B the most because it emphasizes the convenience of the product

I kind of like the lead-in question "sick of eating sandwiches..." It grabbed my attention more than the 3 wacky snack foods headline.

I don't like the use of the word "wacky" in this instance