3 ms·

> Not the case with Twitter. I view content on X without an account every day. > would not put information EXCLUSIVELY on a private That's where they're bein

> Not the case with Twitter. I view content on X without an account every day. > would not put information EXCLUSIVELY on a private That's where they're being released. Literally anyone can copy that to whatever platform they want. This is how "press releases" work in the first place. Is there some assumption that the general public is refreshing the press release page every day to be informed? > Which, btw, is not costly to do. Have you worked in government before?

sterlind 1y ago
> I view content on X without an account every day. How? I can see direct links, but I can't search or look at replies without an account.
- timewizard 1y ago
  How does this implicates broadcast press releases? I can see posts. You seem to have agreed to this. Then you say there are additional features which are not available. I'm asking how those additional features are relevant to the problem? They don't seem relevant to the problem. You also can't send DMs when logged in. Does this impact press releases from the SSA in some way? I get that it's not _fully featured_ but is that actually required for this _particular use case_? Open incognito mode and go here: https://x.com/socialsecurity?lang=en https://x.com/socialsecurity?lang=en What exactly is not working for you?
  - sterlind 1y ago
    you claimed you can do something. I ask you how, and you deflect. can you do it or not?
  - ndriscoll 1y ago
    That link shows me 6 posts all from April 8. "Highlights" shows me another ~10 from the last year or so. "Replies" and "media" require an account. Should I expect to see more from a 16 year old account?
  - pseudalopex 1y ago
    The relevance of search is obvious. Replies are used to work around length limits, clarify, correct, and update. Replies and parents are invisible if not logged in. This is not hypothetical.[1][2] [1] https://x.com/SocialSecurity/status/1909710597324964065 https://x.com/SocialSecurity/status/1909710597324964065 [2] https://xcancel.com/SocialSecurity/status/1909710597324964065 https://xcancel.com/SocialSecurity/status/190971059732496406...
scarecrowbob 1y ago
I personally built much of the current incarnation of blog.ssa.gov CMS and have seen how they gain traffic to that site. It makes very little sense to me to have that information's authoritative origin be on x, but I'm genuinely curious how this would be an improvement over the current situation where SSA publishes to their various web sites. Perhaps you can explain why they should post stuff to X instead of either the CMS tied to the www site or the blog? After all "Literally anyone can copy that to whatever platform they want" so putting pushing things like that to various social media platforms has already been going on for a while. What advantage are you seeing to have them switch from their current CMSs to x?
- timewizard 1y ago
  > and have seen how they gain traffic to that site. And how has that been? > but I'm genuinely curious how this would be an improvement over the current situation where SSA publishes to their various web sites. I didn't claim it would be an improvement. I claimed that it wouldn't actually make much difference. In particular invoking the "age" of the audience and imputing an inability to read anything other than these blogs is a red herring. > Perhaps you can explain why they should post stuff to X instead of either the CMS tied to the www site or the blog? So that they can downsize the communication staff from 700 people down to 50. > After all "Literally anyone can copy that to whatever platform they want" so putting pushing things like that to various social media platforms has already been going on for a while. Precisely. So why is defending the previous mechanism so important? Is the goal to inform the public or to have a nice CMS with tons of blogs in it? It's a nice feather in your cap but as a tax payer you can understand questioning it's ultimate value, can you not? > What advantage are you seeing to have them switch from their current CMSs to x? Less staff. It's hard for me to understand why 700 people were needed to maintain a blog that gets updated once a week. If you want to be concerned with something you should have really paid more attention to how they're changing phone support and engaging in "anti-fraud" there. I think the lede has been intentionally buried with this outrage bait. These are _press releases_. It's the smallest part of the change and one that's likely to have minimal impact to outcomes.
  - 1y ago
JCattheATM 1y ago
> I view content on X without an account every day. So you view the stuff that doesn't require an account - many want to see the stuff that does.
yibg 1y ago
Flip it around, what's a good reason for not ALSO posting on the government website other than pushing people to use twitter?

sterlind 1y ago

> I view content on X without an account every day. How? I can see direct links, but I can't search or look at replies without an account.

timewizard 1y ago
How does this implicates broadcast press releases? I can see posts. You seem to have agreed to this. Then you say there are additional features which are not available. I'm asking how those additional features are relevant to the problem? They don't seem relevant to the problem. You also can't send DMs when logged in. Does this impact press releases from the SSA in some way? I get that it's not _fully featured_ but is that actually required for this _particular use case_? Open incognito mode and go here: https://x.com/socialsecurity?lang=en https://x.com/socialsecurity?lang=en What exactly is not working for you?
- sterlind 1y ago
  you claimed you can do something. I ask you how, and you deflect. can you do it or not?
- ndriscoll 1y ago
  That link shows me 6 posts all from April 8. "Highlights" shows me another ~10 from the last year or so. "Replies" and "media" require an account. Should I expect to see more from a 16 year old account?
- pseudalopex 1y ago
  The relevance of search is obvious. Replies are used to work around length limits, clarify, correct, and update. Replies and parents are invisible if not logged in. This is not hypothetical.[1][2] [1] https://x.com/SocialSecurity/status/1909710597324964065 https://x.com/SocialSecurity/status/1909710597324964065 [2] https://xcancel.com/SocialSecurity/status/1909710597324964065 https://xcancel.com/SocialSecurity/status/190971059732496406...

scarecrowbob 1y ago

I personally built much of the current incarnation of blog.ssa.gov CMS and have seen how they gain traffic to that site. It makes very little sense to me to have that information's authoritative origin be on x, but I'm genuinely curious how this would be an improvement over the current situation where SSA publishes to their various web sites. Perhaps you can explain why they should post stuff to X instead of either the CMS tied to the www site or the blog? After all "Literally anyone can copy that to whatever platform they want" so putting pushing things like that to various social media platforms has already been going on for a while. What advantage are you seeing to have them switch from their current CMSs to x?

timewizard 1y ago
> and have seen how they gain traffic to that site. And how has that been? > but I'm genuinely curious how this would be an improvement over the current situation where SSA publishes to their various web sites. I didn't claim it would be an improvement. I claimed that it wouldn't actually make much difference. In particular invoking the "age" of the audience and imputing an inability to read anything other than these blogs is a red herring. > Perhaps you can explain why they should post stuff to X instead of either the CMS tied to the www site or the blog? So that they can downsize the communication staff from 700 people down to 50. > After all "Literally anyone can copy that to whatever platform they want" so putting pushing things like that to various social media platforms has already been going on for a while. Precisely. So why is defending the previous mechanism so important? Is the goal to inform the public or to have a nice CMS with tons of blogs in it? It's a nice feather in your cap but as a tax payer you can understand questioning it's ultimate value, can you not? > What advantage are you seeing to have them switch from their current CMSs to x? Less staff. It's hard for me to understand why 700 people were needed to maintain a blog that gets updated once a week. If you want to be concerned with something you should have really paid more attention to how they're changing phone support and engaging in "anti-fraud" there. I think the lede has been intentionally buried with this outrage bait. These are _press releases_. It's the smallest part of the change and one that's likely to have minimal impact to outcomes.
- 1y ago

JCattheATM 1y ago

> I view content on X without an account every day. So you view the stuff that doesn't require an account - many want to see the stuff that does.

yibg 1y ago

Flip it around, what's a good reason for not ALSO posting on the government website other than pushing people to use twitter?