Ugvx
36 minutes ago
The only reason why I needed nitter to access x is due to organizations still using it as their main communication solution to their customers. Even my local council uses it. I would like this to be the final push for people to get off x but I suspect its going g to stay and I guess I don't get to see news from my local council anymore.
dolebirchwood
24 minutes ago
I'm totally clueless, but aren't there rules requiring accessibility of public-facing government communications, to the extent that they shouldn't be allowed to use a gated platform when making official statements that are a matter of public interest?
derbOac
8 minutes ago
It should be that way.
My tolerance for people posting to X without also posting to an open platform is over.
Public institutions especially.
There's zero excuse, none.
zahlman
5 minutes ago
> There's zero excuse, none.
How about the general lack of awareness of "open platforms", or of any given one of your objections to X?
Most people are not in the HN bubble.
VLM
19 minutes ago
No, and this policy goes back to publication in for-profit newspapers. Not an issue in the USA in general.
With a disclaimer that there's one zillion governmental entities on the planet overall, so its plausible that one requires no fee and no signup required.
p0w3n3d
5 minutes ago
Web enshittification should be disallowed in public offices. It's so easy to create a news entry in Facebook or Twitter/X but they are always walling you from it unless you subscribe. This is unacceptable in public service sector.