The archive purpose isn't circumventing login, but archiving. They wouldn't want people to default to using them in lieu of the websites you mentioned, anyway.

The reader app's purpose is organising different x posts into a more coherent article, actually readable. While the content is a concatenation of x posts, it's an article by itself.

It sounds to me like you want to enforce rules for the sake of enforcing rules. There doesn't seem to be a reason other than that in your comment. X makes this website's experience worse, so let's follow the spirit of the rules when our interactions are considerably better, and not be rule extremists.

HN has repeatedly broken its own rules for the sake of making things better for HN. The same thing happens here.

Perhaps the rule is fine and your strict interpretation is what's off? E.g. I've always taken that "original source over reporting on the original source" rule as being "post what the original source said instead of what somebody said about the original source" not as "don't ever post verbatim archives of the original source, even if it makes them accessible to read".

Or maybe it's not... but isn't it at least worth considering that kind of debate before admonishing others for not wanting to follow the rule you don't even agree with for the sake of following rules?

On mobile, I can't see the thread. Just the first message

I do love how just about every place that site is mentioned, even Google search results, it's in the format "X (formerly Twitter)".

I have a Twitter account, am logged out of it, but when I visit Twitter links, I can only see the post linked, but not any replies, unless I log in. Sometimes I can't even see the linked post without logging in.

Unsurprisingly, people have different experiences with sites like these that really want you to log in, but will sometimes allow you to view some content without logging in, as a way to entice you.

In my experience, the vast majority of x.com links are unreadable, either an out of context message or some introductory phrase with no actual content.

I'd support such a ban, there are far better sources for that content, such as the link provided in this post.

HN doesn't enforce an "original link only" rule, and there are frequent URL changes to non-original content, mostly articles, which are more readable, or provide more information.

Simply put, x.com links seldom offer content for us to digest and comment on.

X puts most functionality behind a login check. Most importantly, you can’t view threads.

Nitter is dead. After the API changes all the instances are broken and no longer work. Nitter the project itself states this: https://nitter.cz/ What a neat project it was, truly showed the capabilities and development easy of Nimlang.