←back to thread

763 points tartoran | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.248s | source
Show context
hirvi74 ◴[] No.45682294[source]
Not that I agree with this decision, but is there any evidence that these reports yielded any consequences? Or rather, was it one of those, "After conducting an internal investigation, we have determined we did nothing wrong" kind of things?
replies(6): >>45682326 #>>45682397 #>>45682559 #>>45682834 #>>45683342 #>>45684098 #
aDyslecticCrow ◴[] No.45682397[source]
I have a feeling thats exactly how it was used. But that makes its removal even more odd. The hosting cost must be trivial; an email support form connected to a shredder.

Defund the organization in charge of checking and follow-ups is one thing, but its complete removal just smell of incompetence or acknowledging of wrongdoing, or some sort of performance.

And the response is also baffling. "sorry we migrated it systems and accidentally took it down" is the handwave i expected. not "we follow the law regardless so it's not needed".

replies(4): >>45682431 #>>45682502 #>>45682542 #>>45682663 #
foobarian ◴[] No.45682502[source]
Guessing some mid level functionary had to come up with 3 things to do that week and this is an easy bullet point. Saying "Actually we should keep this thing because we're playing 4D chess" doesn't look good on such a status report.
replies(1): >>45682743 #
1. aDyslecticCrow ◴[] No.45682743[source]
I'm not sure that holds up. Because whats written in the status report is the title of this article. And thats not a good looking status report.

This week we took down the "Warcrime report form" because its hosting costs the same as the office coffee machine maintenance.

.. oo gee, mabie that one sounds a bit important. perhaps I should leave that running.