BlueFox, I'm in a hurry and am skip reading. But what you said below stands out. And it's a perfect example why you don't take Jon Tara's word. It was Tara who said Lair was there only 20 days. Call Zulu and get the facts. He was there longer. When Tara lowballed the date, you remembered only his lowball--not my correction. Again, Lair was there longer. Why diminish when you don't have to?
Your inaccurate quote:
"Surely, though, if Lair was brought in just to get things on track and left after 20 days
because he had done that, they wouldn't now be dumping his work? Look back at all
the posts around the time he left."
And a review of the history will show a Lair tenure much longer than 20 days. And this still does not take into account his consultancy prior.
As to your point, sure Lair helped. But also, during that time with Wired breathing lousy fire, spin control was imperative. Hence, an available good firm was brought on board to help sure things up. Is this not logical?
Why cast the slur of minimal tenure when you don't know all the facts concerning Lair? You have done nothing but echo Tara's remarks. And as much as my own remarks may from time to time require correction (whose woudln't in this situation?), I can assure you that Tara's downside opinion frequently doesn't match the progression of what has happened. So don't take what he says as fact when attempting to make an historical judgment, would be my advise.
Again, call the company and get specific details on Lair. Better yet, call Lair! |
