On 25 June 2012 19:31, Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
Could you answer the question? You are making an assertion which rather begs the question why a community member hasn't done exactly that.
No, I can't answer the question because it is based on a false premise. As you know, you can prove anything you like if you start from a false premise.
I wanted to analyse the difference between what you were saying about Mike being will to hire contractors, and the fact that he is not willing to do so in a matter that actually now impacts, via the fundraiser, on the livelihoods of six employees (as it will be when the dev is hired). I want to understand the decision-making process Mike employs.
I thought I might be able to understand that much. The hiring decision is apparently too complicated to explain to the community on this list, so let's start with just one instance of what is involved.
As I've explained, the SSL will get fixed. There is no question of whether WMUK (this isn't Mike's decision, he's just the one that did the hard work of drafting the job description) is willing to fix it. The question is simply over the best way to go about fixing it. The chapter has decided to go about fixing it by hiring a general technical member of staff.
Leadership is often not about making the right decision, but just about making a decision. By far the worst outcome would be to spend ages debating this and end up not having anyone in time to fix anything before the fundraiser. As Jon has said, the board have shown excellent leadership by making a decision when a decision needed to be made. Whether it was the optimal decision really isn't important when compared to the downside of not making a decision at all.