Deprecate X

[ahrkrak]

I believe the community consensus is now clear that we should terminate all activity on X (formerly Twitter), and move the primary social media channel to Bluesky. The account is already set up, let's just move all the posting there. I would also issue guidance recommending projects do likewise, although obviously it's each project's decision what is right for them.

[austinlparker]

+1 from OpenTelemetry (https://bsky.app/profile/opentelemetry.io)

is there a cncf starter pack? ^_^

[bridgetkromhout]

For the Kubernetes project, SIG ContribEx Comms handles the use of the social media channels. /cc @chris-short @fsmunoz @kaslin @mfahlandt

[karenhchu]

Just for explicit clarification purposes, is the ask that CNCF move its account off X and primarily onto Bluesky?

[timothysc]

+1 NB

[mfahlandt]

I must disagree here, we have recently discussed this only a couple of weeks ago in SIG ContribEx Comms. Kubernetesio is our Biggest End User Facing Channel with over 310k Followers. Especially for Critical Comms, as long as we have not a similar Follower Count on other Social Media Channels facing End Users, we can not give this Channel up. However, we have presence on BlueSky, Mastadon and LinkedIn and all channels receive the same comms. We also have strict usage Guidelines for X

[chris-short]

I can speak for only Kubernetes and none of the other CNCF projects.

This has been discussed multiple times in Kubernetes SIG ContribEx Comms meetings. Gravity really matters when we talk about spreading a message far and wide. For end user facing communication we have the largest following on Twitter/X. Until that changes we are unlikely to sacrifice an outlet like that. That's not to say we support the network or its owners.

Personally, I have stopped posting on Twitter/X and deleted the apps. Interestingly, my plan going forward is to only use it for work things or important Kubernetes news. My own audience size there is greater than any place one place as well hence why I'm not deactivating it.

[fsmunoz]

I've also participated in previous conversations around this, an important topic.

Firstly, I'm personally not against CNCF-related accounts (I'm only speaking as part of Kubernetes SIG Contribex Comms) leaving X or any other platform. I agree with @mfahlandt comments on both reach and the regional specificity of the reasons behind the push, but OTOH I also think that we shouldn't gloss over the fact that the LF is a US-based 501(c).

I personally haven't left X, but coming back to reach, I can understand a position that doesn't consider reach the most important factor: in this case the change is implicitly driven by a shared judgement of the changes done in X, considered by some (or many, or most) to be incompatible with the community ethos.

My only suggestion, as someone who was already seeing accounts shadow-banned or deleted before Musk took over, is that a specific decision on leaving X (or Y, or Z) comes with some broadly applicable reasoning behind it that could, in the future, be applied to other social networks. This will be necessary anyway since I don't think that dropping X will go unnoticed, some sort of statement will be asked, and with reach not being a reason to drop it, something needs to be answered.

Apart from that, I'm 100% behind supporting other social networks.

[ahrkrak]

This issue relates specifically to the foundation's social media accounts (@ CloudNativeFdn on X and @ cncf.io on Bluesky). The discussion for individual projects including Kubernetes is separate. Therefore, discussion in Kubernetes SIG ContribEx Comms meetings etc, is good and healthy, but not related to this specific issue. Let's not confuse them.

@mfahlandt please clarify if your "I must disagree here" comment is addressing this issue regarding the CNCF accounts, or the kubernetesio account (which is not being discussed here). I think it's the latter but want to check.

To @karenhchu 's request for clarification, there are three options for addressing this issue: 1) delete the X account completely 2) move all activity to Bluesky, and leave the X account where it is, but inactive, with the profile clearly indicating that fact 3) cross-post everything to both accounts, and treat them as equal (but perhaps signal that Bluesky is our preferred forum - e.g. by sharing Bluesky account names first, or perhaps exclusively, on outbound comms).

My personal preference is for (2) as the "middle path". It seems like a good compromise recognizing everyone's concerns. I understand the arguments for both (1) and (3) as well. My primary concern is that we start engaging at least on an equal basis with Bluesky -- and don't repeat the last week, where we had literally hundreds of posts on X around our flagship event, while Bluesky still says "No posts yet". That is objectively tone deaf to the community. I have a secondary concern that I believe posting on X has become inconsistent with our community values, but recognize that is a judgement call that others may disagree with.