[MattIPv4]

You are missing the point of a status page. They're not automatic things that tell you instantly when something is down -- that'd be pretty pointless, you already know it's down. They're updated by the folks responding to the incident, so you know they know there's an issue and that they're looking into it.

[XCSme]

> that'd be pretty pointless, you already know it's down

How would I know? What if my website doesn't have any monitoring and I use a payment system, shouldn't I automatically be notified when that payment system is down? What if it's down for a week? I think service-providing companies should always announce outages and even suspected outages.

[mejutoco]

I agree with GP. If I am trying to, let's say, watch something on Netflix and it is not working, a status page would confirm that Netflix is down in my region, and I would know that there is nothing wrong with my connection, DNS, or any other potential cause.

Because of this reason I believe they would not be pointless if they were simply status pages, instead of "incident response pages". My hypothesis for them being this way instead is it is too much transparency for some companies for PR and legal reasons.

[bowsamic]

Then it's not an operational status, it's an engineering status. Clearly it is very misleading. I think most people, even devs, think these pages are supposed to reflect the current situation. Btw the Github one still doesn't

[rozenmd]

That's the premise of my whole business - there's definitely a market for an automated status page!

(https://onlineornot.com)