*slow clap*https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/

[noboilerplate@namtao.com]

*slow clap*
https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/

[vavakado@mas.to]

@noboilerplate that's another reason to migrate from to to codeberg or sourcehut or selfhost forgejo.

[aurochs@todon.eu]

@noboilerplate If it works perfectly 100% of the time, you are spending too much on it.

[noboilerplate@namtao.com]

@aurochs a fine sentiment, but is *3-Nines* of uptime too much to ask??

[blaptist@mastodon.xyz]

@noboilerplate *slop clap*

[spdrnl@sigmoid.social]

@noboilerplate Ooooooooh!

[jplebreton@mastodon.social]

@noboilerplate worth noting about the uptime before acquisition numbers: https://social.coop/@fraggle/116329719099788907
i'm a hater and i think the graph would still look essentially just as bad if the before numbers were actually accurate, but that straight green line pegged at 100% is just not true. the facts are on our side so there's no need to fudge things.

[jplebreton@mastodon.social]

@noboilerplate (to be clear i don't think any of said fudging was for malicious/dishonest reasons, just holes in data / methodology.)

[lumi@snug.moe]

@noboilerplate time to switch to codeberg or self-hosted forgejo :3