Name a real risk. Then offer a fix that moves the risk somewhere you cannot see it.
“From a continuity standpoint, we're currently trying to find a different example — but if we have a tornado that wipes out city hall, all of our computer systems that are currently housed here are done. We're gone. We're in the dark ages currently because our servers are so old. We're having to go back to pen and pad.”
This is gaslighting.
- Flock servers could be subject to a natural disaster too.
- Plus there are many more variables between us and those servers than if they had them here.
“This Agreement is not assignable, transferable or sublicensable by either Party, without prior consent. Notwithstanding the foregoing, either Party may assign this Agreement, without the other Party's consent, (i) to any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate entity, or (ii) to any purchaser of all or substantially all of such Party's assets or to any successor by way of merger, consolidation or similar transaction.”
Whoever buys Flock inherits the agreement, and inherits the licence to Springdale's data with it. Springdale is not asked. That is a continuity problem a tornado cannot cause and a hardened server room cannot suffer.
And the department cannot tell you the terms that govern the building the data actually sits in, because it says it has never been given a copy of them.
Twenty seconds before the tornado line, answering the same resident: “I'm completely out of my depth when I'm talking about computers.”