FCC Shutters Website, Keeps Skeleton Crew During Shutdown → Why couldn't they have just left the website up?

I can understand sending people home, but it seems strange to put effort into taking down a website to put up a placeholder when you could of well, just left the server running?

Seriously... nowhere in the "Plan for Orderly Shutdown" does it mention shutdown the website. This is a critical issue that 1 of the essential IT people need to fix... I think I will send them an e-mail.

EDIT - I see that Akamai hosts the FCC site, so even more reason they should have left it up and running. I suspect its politics at play here.

well, I found this: »www.whitehouse.gov/sites ··· 3-22.pdf

It lays out the rules saying they have to put up a placeholder page. On page 14 it says that even if it costs more to take the website down than to leave it up they still have to do it. From the office of the president.

So yeah, just more politics....

oh I am sure it's that case in 100% -- like killing off the nasa.gov and nps.gov websites.. really ... I am guessing "all" these website 'redirects' are more for publicity on the shutdown than actually the sites not being able to function with out people behind them (exp since most of the sites are just static content give or take updated here and there).

Of course it is politics. The intent is to inflict the maximum pain, just like when the sequester kicked in and the FAA cut controller staffing, leaving available funds from deferred projects unspent.

The National Parks Service put up barricades around memorials and monuments on the Mall in Washington DC, even though they are open 24 hours, and are mostly unattended.

A charity had flown in a group of WWII vets to see the WWII memorial, and they arrived yesterday. A request for an exception was rebuffed by both the Park Service and the White House.

So, the WWII vets simply moved aside the barricades and entered the memorial, just like they stormed the beaches in Normandy in 1944.