Re: [Parser] Review Results and Report

From: John Maddock (jz.maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-03-16 11:24:15

> I have to admit that I always found the @Boost_Libraries Twitter
> account somewhat of a mystery. Tweets would occasionally
> emanate from it, but I could discern no underlying logic as to when
> they would appear and what they would announce; and if I remember
> correctly, I once tried to figure out who actually operated it by asking
> around, but without success.
>
> (To be clear, this was in the past.)
>
> Now, I'm generally supportive of us keeping our old ways, because
> they got us where we are, but in this specific case, I don't think our
> old ways ever worked that well.
>
> Maybe we need to address this by having a page on boost.org that
> lists our social media accounts, who is operating them, and on what
> basis; that is, what is the mandate given to their operators by the
> community. Or in other words, what are they supposed to tweet,
> and when.
>
> This "you are in sole control of the account" "no, you are a liar, I'm
> not the only one, but I won't tell you who the others are" business
> does not exactly benefit anyone, in my opinion. A bit more clarity
> and transparency is in order.
>
Thank you Peter, much more succinctly put than I could have managed, and 
spot on as always.

If we're going to have social media accounts, then we should probably 
run the full gamut of FB, X etc and have a clear idea of what is and 
isn't going to be posted there - apart from anything else so that users 
have a clear idea of what they're going to see in their feed.  At the 
very least, release announcements, plus maybe say GSOC projects and 
library review results would be worthwhile, basically the same as the 
boost.announce mailing list.

Best.