Oh, yeah I guess I should say I would NOT have applied for either had they been posted appropriately.
I'm not poking at this because I have a chip on my shoulder.
Sorry you guys please don't hate me, I wish I could just be happy/trust like you say but this is still bothering me.
If the need for a split decision was known this summer, why wasn't it created then?
Okay thank you, that makes sense. I know there are a lot of moving parts and transitional hirings and it's easy for me to sit on this side of the table and judge on how *I think* things should have been done, but I do wish the process would have gone differently. No one can turn back time though.
Oh Ty :facepalm I find lots of errors in your logic, but I'll wait for the Board to respond. No need for me to spiral out the thread. If you want to talk about it privately I'm happy to.
It does not ensure it, however it does suggest it. As I said above, to ensure you have the best candidate, you would want to fish from a relatively big pool. I don't see the threat of there being an overwhelming amount of candidates, considering our size, so no risk there.
I agree with @Elania...
Would someone from the Board be able to speak to why the hiring for CMO wasn't posted at the same time as the hiring for Keeper? From the quote I have below, it appears (unless I am misunderstanding,) that the need for two positions was known, yet only one position was posted.
My most...