So... one guy did all this, it was inappropriate, but you're keeping him on board?
I think the purpose of this blog post was to try to reclaim this*'s reputation after the incident, but for me it just solidified that i should never, ever use thiswebhost.
"Hey buddy, I'm having some trouble with my site. Mind writing a blog post for me?"
More realistically, though, he could've found some PR person after seeing the fallout from his own attempts to calm the storm. If he sticks with it, that would actually be quite smart of him.
I'd also like to see this guy axed, but I can see why they'd want to keep him. Perhaps he holds enough specific technical knowledge that they have to keep him.
What I'm unclear on is why Bernardo can't be invited back. Was his account deleted in such a way that it's unrecoverable? If so, they're keeping someone who deleted potentially months of a customer's work and data, and claiming it's within reason over one use of the f-bomb.
What if another client's Twitter account is hacked? This policy sounds like an open invite to malicious third parties.
You're right, as I discovered on reading the cached Jules post:
> So let’s just recap a little; we have 1 account that is suspended with full access to a backup of their data and their domain names. We have another account that is fully terminated, with all data removed, due to severe breach of our terms.
The why seems to be swept under the rug in Doug's post.
From a customer/outside perspective, I absolutely see how you are coming to this conclusion, but if I suddenly handed you the checkbook to that company, keys to the office and said "Keep this place running, keep making money and keep paying these 10 salaries" your conclusion would probably be different.
I am impressed that the company had the foresight to realize that the people they currently have on suck at CS and need to be replaced with someone better at it.
That is a very self-aware decision.
Also you can't cut your nose off despite your face. Jules is clearly a talented tech lead and you can't boot the only guy out the door that understands the inner workings of such a technical company/service.
I am impressed with how this small company is dealing with this; they are doing the best they possibly can.
The proof will be in the long-term-pudding for sure, but I think these are all sensible moves.
No, actually, if he's technically good, I would also keep him with the admonishment that if he ever interacted with a customer again I'd play tennis with his spleen. I was perfectly happy with this post through that part.
Comments
So... one guy did all this, it was inappropriate, but you're keeping him on board?
I think the purpose of this blog post was to try to reclaim this*'s reputation after the incident, but for me it just solidified that i should never, ever use thiswebhost.
>but you're keeping him on board?
what are the alternatives ? that guy seems to be a company owner and the registrant of the domain, ie. basically the guy _is_ the company :)
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2890546
Interesting. You make me wonder if Doug (the new blog post writer) actually works for the company or if he's even a real person.
I'm not sure where the O would come from, but if Doug and Jules turn out to be the same person, I'm calling him O'Doul's.
They have a different writing style, although he did appear right out of the blue..
"Hey buddy, I'm having some trouble with my site. Mind writing a blog post for me?"
More realistically, though, he could've found some PR person after seeing the fallout from his own attempts to calm the storm. If he sticks with it, that would actually be quite smart of him.
I'd also like to see this guy axed, but I can see why they'd want to keep him. Perhaps he holds enough specific technical knowledge that they have to keep him.
What I'm unclear on is why Bernardo can't be invited back. Was his account deleted in such a way that it's unrecoverable? If so, they're keeping someone who deleted potentially months of a customer's work and data, and claiming it's within reason over one use of the f-bomb.
What if another client's Twitter account is hacked? This policy sounds like an open invite to malicious third parties.
>Was his account deleted in such a way that it's unrecoverable?
Apparently so..
You're right, as I discovered on reading the cached Jules post:
> So let’s just recap a little; we have 1 account that is suspended with full access to a backup of their data and their domain names. We have another account that is fully terminated, with all data removed, due to severe breach of our terms.
The why seems to be swept under the rug in Doug's post.
Does this means that This* does not maintain offsite backup of their customer's data they are administrating?
Scary.
From a customer/outside perspective, I absolutely see how you are coming to this conclusion, but if I suddenly handed you the checkbook to that company, keys to the office and said "Keep this place running, keep making money and keep paying these 10 salaries" your conclusion would probably be different.
I am impressed that the company had the foresight to realize that the people they currently have on suck at CS and need to be replaced with someone better at it.
That is a very self-aware decision.
Also you can't cut your nose off despite your face. Jules is clearly a talented tech lead and you can't boot the only guy out the door that understands the inner workings of such a technical company/service.
I am impressed with how this small company is dealing with this; they are doing the best they possibly can.
The proof will be in the long-term-pudding for sure, but I think these are all sensible moves.
No, actually, if he's technically good, I would also keep him with the admonishment that if he ever interacted with a customer again I'd play tennis with his spleen. I was perfectly happy with this post through that part.