On 25 June 2012 19:23, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 25 June 2012 19:18, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com>
wrote:
Is Mike's view that having a contractor in to
fix the SSL problem would
cost
too much generally shared? The SSL does impact on
the credibility of the
fundraiser, which raised £1M last time and one would hope that number
would
go up in future. As a percentage of one
year's take, what is "too much"?
The decision isn't between hiring a contractor to fix the SSL and not
fixing it. The decision is between hiring a contractor to fix the SSL
and hiring a general technical employee to, among other things, fix
the SSL. A general tech person may have to spend some time reading up
on SSL before they can fix it, but they'll still be able to fix it.
Could you answer the question? You are making an assertion which rather
begs the
question why a community member hasn't done exactly that.
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.
Charles