5 ms·

How to make a great government website

105 points by wormold 2y ago

0xWTF 2y ago
Dave Guarino needs to read Seeing Like a State, Seeing Like a Bank, and Seeing Like a Data Structure. And then write his own Seeing Like a Government Website. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300078152/seeing-like-a-state/ https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300078152/seeing-like-a-... https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/seeing-like-a-bank/ https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/seeing-like-a-bank/ https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/seeing-data-structure https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/seeing-data-structu...
- scraplab 2y ago
  I know Dave personally, and I can assure you he’s read Seeing Like a State! In fact, if you spend more than 30 seconds in his presence he’ll probably give you a copy.
- hnlmorg 2y ago
  The UK government have one: https://www.gov.uk/service-manual https://www.gov.uk/service-manual Specifically the “design” section for our current context.
  - nick88msn 2y ago
    Italy has one too https://designers.italia.it https://designers.italia.it
  - kennydude 2y ago
    The UK Government's efforts to make their services digital, easy to understand and workable is such a great effort. The digital department also has many common tools to help such as notifications, forms, payments as integratable APIs instead of each government unit needing to procure this (at great cost) themselves!
    - simonbarker87 2y ago
      My favourite API endpoint on the internet is https://www.gov.uk/bank-holidays.json https://www.gov.uk/bank-holidays.json an always up to date list of public holidays, makes automated workload planning and working day delivery calculations so much more reliable in our internal app.
      - ssl232 2y ago
        What does the "bunting" key under each event denote?
        ascorbic 2y ago
        If true, it displays celebration bunting on the front page on that day. Seems to be true for all holidays except Good Friday and the Queen's funeral (plus one (probably accidental) Easter Monday). https://github.com/alphagov/frontend/commit/5466c5f9ecc896a430337b66c9b76418c260a066 https://github.com/alphagov/frontend/commit/5466c5f9ecc896a4...
        ssl232 2y ago
        I wonder why Good Friday doesn't get bunting.
        david_allison 2y ago
        Likely the Good Friday Agreement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement
        hnlmorg 2y ago
        The Good Friday agreement was named after the day it was signed on, not the other way around. Good Friday is the Friday before Easter Monday. In Christianity, in symbolises the day Christ died and Monday was the day he rose.
- daguar 2y ago
  Hi! This is Dave. I am in fact perhaps a top 10 fan of James C. Scott. For some evidence of this, please see: https://x.com/search?q=allafarce%20%22seeing%20like%20a%22&src=typed_query https://x.com/search?q=allafarce%20%22seeing%20like%20a%22&s... This is a really cool idea, and I'll consider it. (Aside: I own seeinglikeastate.com)
davisr 2y ago
Ctr+F "javascript" -- no results. Hmm, if a government website necessitates the use of JavaScript, I'd consider that a hallmark of being awful.
- mierz00 2y ago
  I’m not sure if this is a joke but if not.. Governments often have complicated forms that need to cater for a broad range of users. So you need things like conditioning steps, file uploads and progress saving. Have fun doing that in pure HTML and CSS.
  - huygens6363 2y ago
    Broad range of users means keeping it simple and sticking to the standards. The complexity of government forms is not about fancy custom dialogs, elaborate data types or cute animations. There are usually a lot of (simple) questions. Yes/no, checkboxes, dates and times, free fields. The list is not endless. These forms needs to be frustration free as possible. IME all easy targets if you don’t use JS.
  - azornathogron 2y ago
    gov.uk recommends having a single question per page - principally to make the form easier for users, but it also means you can handle progress saving and conditional sections and so on server-side. https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/design/form-structure https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/design/form-structure
    - IshKebab 2y ago
      gov.uk is pretty good, and their forms are quite good. But there are definitely still places where this design is worse than one using JavaScript. For example when paying for tax free childcare you have to enter a date for when you want the payment to go out. Not only is the date picker just three edit boxes (no "tomorrow" button for example), but it isn't validated at all so if you put in today's date (quite reasonable) and click next it will only tell you on the next page that you can't use today. It would be much better if a tiny bit of JavaScript told you as soon as you put the date in, and if it had a "tomorrow" button, which would also require some JavaScript. JavaScript was invented for a reason!
niksmac 2y ago
[flagged]
notjulianjaynes 2y ago
I thought this was an interesting read. There's certainly a lot of room for improvement for websites that allow you to sign up for government benefits (although i suspect in some cases the friction is intentional). My biggest gripe with govenrnment websites is not the parts where they're taking in user data, but the parts where they silo their public data. In my experience this is the worst at the local and federal level. Infuriatingly, my local city council does not OCR their most recent minutes, but they do OCR their archived minutes. So you can search their minutes, just as long as they aren't relevant anymore. Another thing is using javascript buttons to serve PDF files, and filenames have no refeence point with their titles. So if you need a few at once you've gotta stop and manually change the filename from 123455325.pdf to something intelligible.
- matsemann 2y ago
  > (although i suspect in some cases the friction is intentional) I've worked on the first digital forms for NAV in Norway, which handles parental leave, sick leave, when you've lost your job etc. We didn't want friction. People have a right to this help and money, and making people self served is a win for all: - around 90 % of submitted paper forms had some kind of error, which the case worker would have to fix while entering the form manually into the case system. Often had to contact the client and spend so much time on things not giving value. - people would have to contact case workes constantly, because the forms were made by lawyers. "If you filled in 16a you also need to fill in 46ac and 47f" would give a huge tree of possibilities most people couldn't navigate. - making the form digital, we could conditionally show the correct parts. We could pull in data from other systems and prefill parts (like your employer, registered kids, address) - the first version we actually just sent to a printer and someone would print and mail all digital forms so the case workers still would have to do much of the manual typing, but at least we quickly made it easier for the clients. - then later when the case systems were ready we could instead push some xml directly instead of mailing paper. The clients didn't notice a difference. But this to say that we really tried making their lives easier even before everything else was in place. - the core is that we want the case workers to do less of the useless things, and spend their time doing the valuable things. - the first digital version of the parental leave form was basically what we kall "strøm på papir" or "electrical powered paper". While it was digital and easier to use, it didn't solve all issues with the paper form, as it still contained all questions and was huge. Then it was a lot of work, political, with lawyers, even law makers, if the next version could be better. Is there things we could stop asking for? Could the law be streamlined and edge cases removed? Etc. All to make it so that the common 95 % don't have to be confused and have to read and understand lots of stuff only relevant to a small minority.
bruce511 2y ago
Hardware. Lots of hardware. The first law of govt sites is insanely high usage, clustered around very specific date and times. The first rule of govt websites is "thou shalt not crash". For startup folks dreaming of growing a single horn, over provisioning is an indulgence, scaling design an all-too-often vanity. But govt sites should be designed for insane scale from day 1.
- danpalmer 2y ago
  I disagree. Most content on government sites is static content, you could fairly easily deliver much of that to a large population with relatively little hardware, assuming the software is developed such that static delivery is possible. There are "processes" that people need to complete, but these are typically life-changing processes, things you do once in your life, or maybe once a year at most. Even if those are clustered in time as you say, and most aren't, it doesn't take a lot of hardware to run most of those processes, especially if again the software is designed well and to pull things off the critical path that don't need to be. The healthcare.gov rollout is often pointed to as an example of these things going wrong, the site crashed, and it would be easy to say it needed more hardware, but actually the core issue was that it was "enterprise software" – it was software built by people used to building software for small numbers of expert users in a company who might go through training, who might be using on-prem servers, who might have a lot of complex business requirements. The big improvement came when a bunch of producty-UXy sorts of people came along and scrapped most of the system, made a simple piece of user-facing software that did the minimum necessary, and built it with modern (at the time) web technologies, not from throwing hardware at it.
  - bruce511 2y ago
    Yep HealthCare.gov , but its by far not the only site to struggle. And hardware goes beyond cpu and includes things like hardware for the database, resilient fall-over, network bandwidth (ok, less of an issue these days) and so on. Sure, it takes more than -just- hardware, and yes sites can be more-or-less resource hungry. But ultimately "the server is offline" is not a good thing. Lots of things cluster when you don't expect it. Like sites to take bookings for national parks (as an example).
sgu999 2y ago
How to not make great government websites: use random domain names instead of a single dedicated tld, different contractors and design for each, make sure there's enough overlap in functionality in-between each of them, and then regularly remind everyone that it's very easy to scam you with fishing attacks. Here are just some of the official French websites: service-public.fr impots.gouv.fr gouvernement.fr ameli.fr vie-publique.fr info.gouv.fr santepubliquefrance.fr
- Kiala 2y ago
  Yeah, the Netherlands got 1,800 of those..
  - Tmpod 2y ago
    Yeah here in Portugal we have a ton of those too. Each municipality has its own cm-<name>.pt domain, but there some exceptions. For example, Lisbon's domain redirects to lisboa.pt, and while no other major city I know does this, almost all of them have separate website and domain without the cm- part.
- g15jv2dp 2y ago
  That's a very unfair take. The examples you list are of a completely different nature. > gouvernement.fr info.gouv.fr These are the same website. gouvernement.fr is a legacy URL that redirects to info.gouv.fr. Why did you include both? > ameli.fr As I'm sure you know, in France, social security is not administered by the government directly but by the social partners. They're in charge of managing ameli.fr, not the government. Go there, you won't find any logo from any ministry. Why did you include it? With this and the previous example, I cannot shake the feeling that you're on a mission to denigrate with little regard to the facts. > vie-publique.fr santepubliquefrance.fr These websites are basically blogs about respectively the institutions of the republic and about public health. > service-public.fr General informational website. For most sensitive procedures, you're redirected to a .gouv.fr website. Yes, it could have had a .gouv.fr URL, that's true. > impots.gouv.fr Yep, that's the tax website. You can notice it's official thanks to gouv.fr, like all website where you do actual online procedures.
strnisa 2y ago
I think that the UK one (https://www.gov.uk/ https://www.gov.uk/) is generally very good: everything in one place, relatively simple UI, good overall structure.
q_revert 2y ago
somewhat of an aside, but really enjoyed the scrolling dynamic on this site
alexcason 2y ago
Mandatory link to the one thing in the UK that actually works well: https://www.gov.uk https://www.gov.uk Further details: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-digital-service https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-digit...
- lobsang 2y ago
  I'm genuinely curious if people still think gov.uk is a good example - or I guess, as good as it was. I'm slightly biased from past experience but my feeling is a lot of the critical thinking that went into gov.uk has been lost. I just can't see the original form of GDS having an cookie banner on gov.uk for example. These were the guys that rightly pointed out that there is no actual need for people to have user accounts to access most govenment services and that no one cares about what govt department they are forced to interact with and yet, I reccently had to create a DVLA account to get an updated drivers liscence (something that happens once a decade).
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    The Identity side of GDS has definitely been the worst. I wonder if due to the politics around that service, the thinking has stopped and the Just Get It Done, Even If It's Silly crowd has replaced it.
    - lobsang 2y ago
      The identity side has allways been a problem (P)politically and technically. I think the original GDS was completely correct in basically forcing services not to have them, they are unnecessary for almost/all transactional inerteractions - where they are useful is for things with long term, cosistent interactions i.e. where theres an actual relationship, such as benefits or tax - unfortunatly HMRC and DWP both want to "own" the relationship as individual departments (or even benefits) rather than as a part of the government, and the UK is adverse to anything that looks like a national identity system (ignoring the fact we already have national insurance numbers for everyone(?), passport numbers, etc.) Where I think the loss of critical thinking bites the most though are the small things: - cookie banner on gov.uk - my DVLA password, had to have numbers etc (despite password compostion rules not been a recommeneded best practice for almost 10 years [thanks NIST / GCHQ]) - forms are now so simple due to the mantra of "only ask one thing at a time" that you lose all context as you now have a page for "name", "date of birth" etc. instead of one page for "personal details"
red_admiral 2y ago
> When we started working on GetCalFresh, the online application was about 200 questions across 50 or so screens. And that is why people who want to send you marketing e-mail have literally a single field: e-mail address. Not even a 2nd field "name" so they can send you personalized email, or "date of birth" so they can send you special offers for your birthday.
bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago
Didn't read, but right off the bat i'm skeptical of an article titled "How to Make a Great Government Website" that doesnt mention gov.uk
thimkerbell 2y ago
Where do I report a Franchise Tax Board anomaly?

105 points by wormold 2y ago

Dave Guarino needs to read Seeing Like a State, Seeing Like a Bank, and Seeing Like a Data Structure. And then write his own Seeing Like a Government Website. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300078152/seeing-like-a-state/ https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300078152/seeing-like-a-... https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/seeing-like-a-bank/ https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/seeing-like-a-bank/ https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/seeing-data-structure https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/seeing-data-structu...

scraplab 2y ago
I know Dave personally, and I can assure you he’s read Seeing Like a State! In fact, if you spend more than 30 seconds in his presence he’ll probably give you a copy.
hnlmorg 2y ago
The UK government have one: https://www.gov.uk/service-manual https://www.gov.uk/service-manual Specifically the “design” section for our current context.
- nick88msn 2y ago
  Italy has one too https://designers.italia.it https://designers.italia.it
- kennydude 2y ago
  The UK Government's efforts to make their services digital, easy to understand and workable is such a great effort. The digital department also has many common tools to help such as notifications, forms, payments as integratable APIs instead of each government unit needing to procure this (at great cost) themselves!
  - simonbarker87 2y ago
    My favourite API endpoint on the internet is https://www.gov.uk/bank-holidays.json https://www.gov.uk/bank-holidays.json an always up to date list of public holidays, makes automated workload planning and working day delivery calculations so much more reliable in our internal app.
    - ssl232 2y ago
      What does the "bunting" key under each event denote?
      - ascorbic 2y ago
        If true, it displays celebration bunting on the front page on that day. Seems to be true for all holidays except Good Friday and the Queen's funeral (plus one (probably accidental) Easter Monday). https://github.com/alphagov/frontend/commit/5466c5f9ecc896a430337b66c9b76418c260a066 https://github.com/alphagov/frontend/commit/5466c5f9ecc896a4...
        ssl232 2y ago
        I wonder why Good Friday doesn't get bunting.
        david_allison 2y ago
        Likely the Good Friday Agreement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Friday_Agreement
        hnlmorg 2y ago
        The Good Friday agreement was named after the day it was signed on, not the other way around. Good Friday is the Friday before Easter Monday. In Christianity, in symbolises the day Christ died and Monday was the day he rose.
daguar 2y ago
Hi! This is Dave. I am in fact perhaps a top 10 fan of James C. Scott. For some evidence of this, please see: https://x.com/search?q=allafarce%20%22seeing%20like%20a%22&src=typed_query https://x.com/search?q=allafarce%20%22seeing%20like%20a%22&s... This is a really cool idea, and I'll consider it. (Aside: I own seeinglikeastate.com)

davisr 2y ago

Ctr+F "javascript" -- no results. Hmm, if a government website necessitates the use of JavaScript, I'd consider that a hallmark of being awful.

mierz00 2y ago
I’m not sure if this is a joke but if not.. Governments often have complicated forms that need to cater for a broad range of users. So you need things like conditioning steps, file uploads and progress saving. Have fun doing that in pure HTML and CSS.
- huygens6363 2y ago
  Broad range of users means keeping it simple and sticking to the standards. The complexity of government forms is not about fancy custom dialogs, elaborate data types or cute animations. There are usually a lot of (simple) questions. Yes/no, checkboxes, dates and times, free fields. The list is not endless. These forms needs to be frustration free as possible. IME all easy targets if you don’t use JS.
- azornathogron 2y ago
  gov.uk recommends having a single question per page - principally to make the form easier for users, but it also means you can handle progress saving and conditional sections and so on server-side. https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/design/form-structure https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/design/form-structure
  - IshKebab 2y ago
    gov.uk is pretty good, and their forms are quite good. But there are definitely still places where this design is worse than one using JavaScript. For example when paying for tax free childcare you have to enter a date for when you want the payment to go out. Not only is the date picker just three edit boxes (no "tomorrow" button for example), but it isn't validated at all so if you put in today's date (quite reasonable) and click next it will only tell you on the next page that you can't use today. It would be much better if a tiny bit of JavaScript told you as soon as you put the date in, and if it had a "tomorrow" button, which would also require some JavaScript. JavaScript was invented for a reason!

niksmac 2y ago

[flagged]

notjulianjaynes 2y ago

I thought this was an interesting read. There's certainly a lot of room for improvement for websites that allow you to sign up for government benefits (although i suspect in some cases the friction is intentional). My biggest gripe with govenrnment websites is not the parts where they're taking in user data, but the parts where they silo their public data. In my experience this is the worst at the local and federal level. Infuriatingly, my local city council does not OCR their most recent minutes, but they do OCR their archived minutes. So you can search their minutes, just as long as they aren't relevant anymore. Another thing is using javascript buttons to serve PDF files, and filenames have no refeence point with their titles. So if you need a few at once you've gotta stop and manually change the filename from 123455325.pdf to something intelligible.

matsemann 2y ago
> (although i suspect in some cases the friction is intentional) I've worked on the first digital forms for NAV in Norway, which handles parental leave, sick leave, when you've lost your job etc. We didn't want friction. People have a right to this help and money, and making people self served is a win for all: - around 90 % of submitted paper forms had some kind of error, which the case worker would have to fix while entering the form manually into the case system. Often had to contact the client and spend so much time on things not giving value. - people would have to contact case workes constantly, because the forms were made by lawyers. "If you filled in 16a you also need to fill in 46ac and 47f" would give a huge tree of possibilities most people couldn't navigate. - making the form digital, we could conditionally show the correct parts. We could pull in data from other systems and prefill parts (like your employer, registered kids, address) - the first version we actually just sent to a printer and someone would print and mail all digital forms so the case workers still would have to do much of the manual typing, but at least we quickly made it easier for the clients. - then later when the case systems were ready we could instead push some xml directly instead of mailing paper. The clients didn't notice a difference. But this to say that we really tried making their lives easier even before everything else was in place. - the core is that we want the case workers to do less of the useless things, and spend their time doing the valuable things. - the first digital version of the parental leave form was basically what we kall "strøm på papir" or "electrical powered paper". While it was digital and easier to use, it didn't solve all issues with the paper form, as it still contained all questions and was huge. Then it was a lot of work, political, with lawyers, even law makers, if the next version could be better. Is there things we could stop asking for? Could the law be streamlined and edge cases removed? Etc. All to make it so that the common 95 % don't have to be confused and have to read and understand lots of stuff only relevant to a small minority.

bruce511 2y ago

Hardware. Lots of hardware. The first law of govt sites is insanely high usage, clustered around very specific date and times. The first rule of govt websites is "thou shalt not crash". For startup folks dreaming of growing a single horn, over provisioning is an indulgence, scaling design an all-too-often vanity. But govt sites should be designed for insane scale from day 1.

danpalmer 2y ago
I disagree. Most content on government sites is static content, you could fairly easily deliver much of that to a large population with relatively little hardware, assuming the software is developed such that static delivery is possible. There are "processes" that people need to complete, but these are typically life-changing processes, things you do once in your life, or maybe once a year at most. Even if those are clustered in time as you say, and most aren't, it doesn't take a lot of hardware to run most of those processes, especially if again the software is designed well and to pull things off the critical path that don't need to be. The healthcare.gov rollout is often pointed to as an example of these things going wrong, the site crashed, and it would be easy to say it needed more hardware, but actually the core issue was that it was "enterprise software" – it was software built by people used to building software for small numbers of expert users in a company who might go through training, who might be using on-prem servers, who might have a lot of complex business requirements. The big improvement came when a bunch of producty-UXy sorts of people came along and scrapped most of the system, made a simple piece of user-facing software that did the minimum necessary, and built it with modern (at the time) web technologies, not from throwing hardware at it.
- bruce511 2y ago
  Yep HealthCare.gov , but its by far not the only site to struggle. And hardware goes beyond cpu and includes things like hardware for the database, resilient fall-over, network bandwidth (ok, less of an issue these days) and so on. Sure, it takes more than -just- hardware, and yes sites can be more-or-less resource hungry. But ultimately "the server is offline" is not a good thing. Lots of things cluster when you don't expect it. Like sites to take bookings for national parks (as an example).

sgu999 2y ago

How to not make great government websites: use random domain names instead of a single dedicated tld, different contractors and design for each, make sure there's enough overlap in functionality in-between each of them, and then regularly remind everyone that it's very easy to scam you with fishing attacks. Here are just some of the official French websites: service-public.fr impots.gouv.fr gouvernement.fr ameli.fr vie-publique.fr info.gouv.fr santepubliquefrance.fr

Kiala 2y ago
Yeah, the Netherlands got 1,800 of those..
- Tmpod 2y ago
  Yeah here in Portugal we have a ton of those too. Each municipality has its own cm-<name>.pt domain, but there some exceptions. For example, Lisbon's domain redirects to lisboa.pt, and while no other major city I know does this, almost all of them have separate website and domain without the cm- part.
g15jv2dp 2y ago
That's a very unfair take. The examples you list are of a completely different nature. > gouvernement.fr info.gouv.fr These are the same website. gouvernement.fr is a legacy URL that redirects to info.gouv.fr. Why did you include both? > ameli.fr As I'm sure you know, in France, social security is not administered by the government directly but by the social partners. They're in charge of managing ameli.fr, not the government. Go there, you won't find any logo from any ministry. Why did you include it? With this and the previous example, I cannot shake the feeling that you're on a mission to denigrate with little regard to the facts. > vie-publique.fr santepubliquefrance.fr These websites are basically blogs about respectively the institutions of the republic and about public health. > service-public.fr General informational website. For most sensitive procedures, you're redirected to a .gouv.fr website. Yes, it could have had a .gouv.fr URL, that's true. > impots.gouv.fr Yep, that's the tax website. You can notice it's official thanks to gouv.fr, like all website where you do actual online procedures.

strnisa 2y ago

I think that the UK one (https://www.gov.uk/ https://www.gov.uk/) is generally very good: everything in one place, relatively simple UI, good overall structure.

q_revert 2y ago

somewhat of an aside, but really enjoyed the scrolling dynamic on this site

alexcason 2y ago

Mandatory link to the one thing in the UK that actually works well: https://www.gov.uk https://www.gov.uk Further details: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-digital-service https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/government-digit...

lobsang 2y ago
I'm genuinely curious if people still think gov.uk is a good example - or I guess, as good as it was. I'm slightly biased from past experience but my feeling is a lot of the critical thinking that went into gov.uk has been lost. I just can't see the original form of GDS having an cookie banner on gov.uk for example. These were the guys that rightly pointed out that there is no actual need for people to have user accounts to access most govenment services and that no one cares about what govt department they are forced to interact with and yet, I reccently had to create a DVLA account to get an updated drivers liscence (something that happens once a decade).
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  The Identity side of GDS has definitely been the worst. I wonder if due to the politics around that service, the thinking has stopped and the Just Get It Done, Even If It's Silly crowd has replaced it.
  - lobsang 2y ago
    The identity side has allways been a problem (P)politically and technically. I think the original GDS was completely correct in basically forcing services not to have them, they are unnecessary for almost/all transactional inerteractions - where they are useful is for things with long term, cosistent interactions i.e. where theres an actual relationship, such as benefits or tax - unfortunatly HMRC and DWP both want to "own" the relationship as individual departments (or even benefits) rather than as a part of the government, and the UK is adverse to anything that looks like a national identity system (ignoring the fact we already have national insurance numbers for everyone(?), passport numbers, etc.) Where I think the loss of critical thinking bites the most though are the small things: - cookie banner on gov.uk - my DVLA password, had to have numbers etc (despite password compostion rules not been a recommeneded best practice for almost 10 years [thanks NIST / GCHQ]) - forms are now so simple due to the mantra of "only ask one thing at a time" that you lose all context as you now have a page for "name", "date of birth" etc. instead of one page for "personal details"

red_admiral 2y ago

> When we started working on GetCalFresh, the online application was about 200 questions across 50 or so screens. And that is why people who want to send you marketing e-mail have literally a single field: e-mail address. Not even a 2nd field "name" so they can send you personalized email, or "date of birth" so they can send you special offers for your birthday.

bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago

Didn't read, but right off the bat i'm skeptical of an article titled "How to Make a Great Government Website" that doesnt mention gov.uk

thimkerbell 2y ago

Where do I report a Franchise Tax Board anomaly?