(008274.77-E001840.93NAVRLOSUC20V)   

[On Alex Linder’s pieville.net one guy got really angry with Gab. I too went to Gab to post and they’re down. They’re like a South African clown show. I can’t believe it. Feel free to go to Alex Linder’s pieville.net – its still up and running 24/7 without any hassles. Jan]

This is what John on Pieville said:

UGH, NEW GAB AND “UPGRADES”. NEW GAB FIASCO PROVES GAB IS A HOBBY AND NEVER COULD BE A THREAT TO TWITTER, FACEBOOK, ETC.

Is not “New, New, New Gab,” i.e., Gab after it’s original code base, its updated code base, its switch to the Mastodon code base, its update to that code base, supposed to be written anew to run on Node.js / Javascript?

Whatever happened to that?

Why was replacing the UI the chosen first step to “New, New, New Gab” rather than getting down the new back end supposedly to run on Node.js / Javascript and execute the ActivityPub protocol?

Why does not Gab execs and product managers roll out UI betas to volunteers using a different URL, say https://beta19.gab.com (where 19 would be the 19th iteration for testing, e.g.)?

The UI should have ZERO bearing on the back end (the software that fetches the data from storage to read / or accepts the data write to storage).

Forcing a switched UI without first putting that UI through its paces seems reckless and not very clever at all.

No UI change should break a web site, yet here we are with Gab, a broken web site because of an eye-candy desire. For even if this UI worked, there are no new features being displayed for access.

The winning move would be to revert to the old, but working UI and then start the right way, by offering up the new UI at a different URL to let people discover all of the bugs so everything can be fixed before site-wide adoption.

#Gab #GabUI #GabWoes #SoftwareManagement #SoftwareDoneRight