I'd like a status update on S5. (Last one with %'s was four hours ago.)
I am grateful that Mike has been transparent and admitted to the errors and issues, and that he has identified ways to avoid this happening again. I do, however, have a lingering concern about how employees and processes are being managed and will be managed. That Mike didn't realize that snapshots weren't configured properly suggests to me that maybe he trusted someone to do this right. That numerous issues were encountered in the disaster-recovery process suggests to me that maybe it wasn't tested rigorously enough. With so much riding on their actions, IMO there should be a complete rethinking of this.
Think of a pilot and co-pilot in a commercial jet - as I understand it, they are both highly competent and capable of going through the pre-flight checklist on their own, but they don't - they do it together. Yes, they will spell each other occasionally during flight so one can go to the bathroom or deal with an issue in the cabin, but for the most part they are expected to be alert to the potential mistakes of the other, and there in real time to work on any issues that arise together. In addition, in designing plane systems, engineers have to ask, "What mistakes might pilots make", and they do their best to design systems and processes to not allow them make those mistakes.
I would be interested in hearing from Mike once this is all over what will change in terms of his management of people and processes.