On 25 June 2012 19:39, Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
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.
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.
OK, I have an answer of sorts. To me fixing the SSL looks urgent. So one could say that paying the going commercial rate to have it fixed, by someone who knows what he or she is doing, is a good idea. Then the hiring of a technical person (I think a CTO is needed right now, not a dev, but that appears to be a minority view) could proceed uncluttered by that decision. What you are telling me, Tom, is that this is not the way the Board thinks.
Charles