On 25 June 2012 19:23, Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton@gmail.com> wrote:
On 25 June 2012 19:18, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matthews@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"?
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