I am OP, but I posted it here because I thought it was interesting, not because I own the argument directly myself, however: A static doc held in aggregate by

I am OP, but I posted it here because I thought it was interesting, not because I own the argument directly myself, however: A static doc held in aggregate by a larger hosting firm is likely to be more beneficial power wise than a mostly-idle self-hosted server, isn't it? There is also functionality available within Github (forking, pull requests, etc.), that developers are familiar with and able to engage with as a campaigning perspective that a self-hosting solution would not have. So the argument of hosting it on Azure's DC vs your own undermining the campaign doesn't hold up for me, and as a static doc this is about as energy efficient as you can get really. More needs to be done to make servers less toxic to the planet, but I don't think their use of a GitHub repo undermines their campaign and I am curious to find people who do. Would you genuinely find it less objectionable if they used a mostly-idle server on their own network?