This has been unfortunately necessary since DOGE has worked to really avoid any transparency or accountability. If FOIA or legal filings have more information, I do add them, but I always provide the source citation for you to know.
Isn't that the point? That the oversight of DOGE is so bad that the only way to get information about its operations is through online news? Banana republic level of state behavior.
It's probably just sourcing data from doge.gov which already lists every single thing doge is cutting. This "tracking" website is just a way to add a democrat slant toa republican led project. This version literally starts with "tracking the damage" as their sub-header slogan.
Far from it. There has already been ample reporting on how inflated and distorted DOGE's savings are (for instance, they made rudimentary errors in understanding how blanket purchase agreements work and also counted the whole amounts of contracts as savings when they canceled ones that were already mostly disbursed). You can probably search for coverage by ProPublica or David Farenthold if you want to see what I mean, but I would guess you don't want to.
Instead, I have been focusing my efforts on tracking DOGE's staffing in agencies and their activities and system access there. DOGE has not been transparent at all. Rather, they have abused the Vacancies Act and government detailing to hide their activities and skirt many of the laws around government ethics, privacy and data security in the process. And they have been doing a lot of damage in the process, claiming to be doing "IT Modernization" but doing many things outside of the scope of the Executive Order that established them and also the separation of powers that gives Congress the power over appropriations.
>okay? Why are you browsing my comment history lol
Why not? That's kind of the whole point of having accounts here on HN. To create an environment where folks can discuss stuff in good faith. Posting history is public because the posts were public in the first place and they represent who you are (or present yourself to be) on the site.
It allows each of us to be authentically 'us'. Do you not stand by the things you've posted in the past four plus years?
If you do, why do you care if people are looking at your posting history?
If you don't stand by what you've written here in the past, you're likely not posting in good faith.
Either way, why are you concerned about folks looking at the stuff you've publicly posted in the past?
Do i seem concerned? You are the one whose only reply to my post was to my history rather than addressing the topic. I stand by all of those things, its just odd that you would be so concerned with that.