Following recent discussions, it was agreed that the Chapel should obtain an address on the Internet so that basic information could, in due course, be made available to members of the public with access to a home computer. Our good friend Simon Potts has recently invested in a personal computer, a 386i, and has offered to assist.

Our first choice, thechapelofstletussalata.com, was already taken by another party. We therefore agreed to proceed with tinchapel.com, which describes the building adequately and leaves less opportunity for typing errors.

The address has now been purchased.

It should be noted that purchasing an Internet address does not automatically provide a website. This requires a separate arrangement involving hosting, server space or similar facilities. Simon will investigate and speak to someone who knows how to put words and photographs on it.

Details

• Internet address/domain: tinchapel.com
• Supplier: UK Internet Names Ltd
• Registration period: 2 years
• Cost: £24.99 plus VAT
• Total paid: £29.36
• Paid by: Simon Potts, since reimbursed through petty cash.

No date has been agreed for the website to become visible. Nor has any commitment been made regarding updates or the identification of visitors. Simon believes a visitor counter can be obtained for a small additional payment, although this would establish how many people had looked at the site rather than who they were.

Dear Geoff,

I am writing to apologise for the manner of my last message, and for the upset it caused. I was frustrated at the time, but that does not excuse putting private matters, including the website password, where everyone could see them.

I also want to say that the new website is looking very good. You have clearly got to grips with it far more quickly than I ever did, and I admire the way you have taken it on. I know I gave the impression for many years that I understood what I was doing, but the truth is that I mostly did not. I was frightened to ask for help because I am meant to be an IT professional, and admitting that I was essentially making it up as I went along felt worse each year.

That is the main reason updates took so long. It was not always pressure of work, although I may have said that more than once. Often I simply could not remember where things were, what password I had used, or why pressing one button caused three new problems to appear.

I am sorry that you are now having difficulty editing or deleting some of the old posts, particularly the one containing the login details. I would offer to help, but in view of the above it would probably be kinder to everyone if I did not.

What I would like, if you feel able to allow it, is to return to the Chapel simply as a member of the congregation. I miss everyone more than I expected, and I would very much like to attend the September Showdown. It has always been my favourite event of the year, and something I genuinely look forward to.

Please accept my apologies. I hope we can put this behind us in time, and that I might see you and the others again soon.

Yours sincerely,
Simon Potts
--ENDS--

I wish to make a formal complaint about my conduct as the developer of the Chapel website, which has led to visitors experiencing unreasonable delays when opening pages.

I accept that I have, on occasion, transferred blame to the visitors and suggested that their difficulties were related to poor internet service around the Chapel. I now know that this was not the only reason they were struggling.

I became aware of the full extent of the problem through remarks overheard in local businesses. By this point, the Chapel’s name was apparently being used to describe any circumstance involving an excessive wait. I cannot say how widely this expression has spread, but it seems to be in common parlance at least in Rowthale.

I am deeply ashamed of having brought this institution into disrepute.

The Chapel Computer Club helped me to fix the site speed and I subsequently published an apology. Whilst this public apology did not immediately appear on the site, I am assured that this was because of the five-minute caching solution that we have implemented.

I realise that this has introduced a more serious problem concerning the health and safety of visitors. In the event of a fire or other threat within the Chapel building, the first step of the Chapel emergency action plan is to publish an alert on the website. Under the new arrangement, this alert may take five minutes to appear. I am concerned that those of us already aware of the fire would find it difficult to carry on normally until everyone else had read the notice.

I ask the committee to consider whether my handling of the website fell below the standard reasonably expected of my role.

As both the complainant and the subject of this complaint, I recognise that there may be a conflict of interest. I will therefore leave the room during any discussion of my conduct, provided another member is willing to take the minutes. I would prefer that this is agreed beforehand, as on the previous occasion I left a meeting on principle, no record was made of my having done so.

I will accept any sanction the committee considers appropriate.

**UPDATE: 16 October 2026.
The committee has now dealt with this matter.

Glyn → Stephen

Stephen, have you seen Geoff’s complaint about himself? He sent it to me last night, then sent a second email this morning asking why the subject of the complaint hadn't been informed yet. I said I assumed he already knew. Apparently this isn't good enough and we should follow the proper processes.

Stephen → Glyn

Yes, I’ve read it. I think we should deal with this before doing anything else. You can call him to warn him that someone has raised a complaint about him; then I will call him to thank him for bringing this matter to our attention and outline how we intend to deal with his complaint.

Glyn → Stephen

Right. Well, the website loads really quickly now. I tried it over breakfast and got straight into the notices section with almost no delay at all. I don’t particularly want a disciplinary meeting about something that’s already working; and if we suspend him, one of us will have to do the website. I assume you don’t want to?

Stephen → Glyn

No, and I couldn’t do that in my Council capacity as it would be a conflict of interest. My main concern is the paragraph about the fire. Do you remember approving a procedure where we put it on the website first? I only remember attending a pre-meeting and subsequent proper meeting that agreed a procedure should be written. That’s quite a different thing to actually agreeing on the procedure itself.

Glyn → Stephen

I don’t remember seeing it. He did send something with “urgent” in the subject, but that was the same week he wanted our inside leg measurements for the high-visibility trousers. I must have assumed it was more about that. We should just tell him he can leave immediately if there’s a fire. There's no need to wait for the notice to be published.

Stephen → Glyn

Yes, although we should state that everyone can leave. Otherwise he may take that as a specific exemption attached to the caretaker’s role. I’d also avoid the word “can”. We should probably say “must”.

Glyn → Stephen

Fine. Everyone must leave if there’s a fire. On the complaint itself, if we just thank him for bringing it to our attention and say we’ve spoken to the person responsible. Can we just leave it at that?

Stephen → Glyn

Yes. Are you able to ring him briefly now? Tell him we’ve received the complaint and give him an opportunity to respond. Then I’ll ring him about whether he’s satisfied with the response.

*Following Glyn’s telephone call with Geoff;

Glyn → Stephen

I spoke with him, he understands everyone must leave immediately if there’s a fire. He’s going to put that on the website. It's your turn to call him now.

*Following Stephen's telephone with Geoff.

Stephen → Glyn

Right, I’ve spoken to him. I told him we considered the apology sufficient and didn’t propose any further action. He was quiet for a bit, then asked whether that was the decision of the whole Committee? I said I’d discussed it with you and you agreed with me. He said that he should vote too because all committee members were needed to make a decision of this magnitude. He voted in agreement that the apology was sufficient as it was his first offence, but next time it would be different.

What did you actually agree about closing the complaint from the subject's side?

Glyn → Stephen

He asked me to send these voice notes which he will use to write a letter to himself explaining the committee's decision. He’ll send us a draft first. Apparently he then needs to be given fourteen days to appeal, even though he’s already told me he won’t.

Stephen → Glyn

Did he seem reassured?

Glyn → Stephen

I think so. He asked whether the letter could say we’d taken the matter seriously. I said yes. Then he asked how seriously, because he’d need that for the heading.

Stephen → Glyn

Just “Outcome of Complaint” will do. We shouldn’t be grading how seriously we’ve taken it. Did you mention the Computer Club’s help? It would be appropriate to acknowledge that.

Glyn → Stephen

Yes. He’s grateful to them, although he said we should bear in mind that they’d been using the website for months without reporting anything.

Stephen → Glyn

Yes, well. Just send me the draft when it arrives and we can close this. I don’t think there’s anything here that needs referring to the Council.

Glyn → Stephen

Fine. He’s also said he will transcribe the voice notes as they will provide an accurate record of our deliberations.

Stephen → Glyn

That's fine. If he wants me to sign a waiver allowing their publication get him to send a blank form across. I need to go now.

Glyn → Stephen

Will do. I'll also ask him to add a downloadable waiver form to the forms section. Thanks for your help, have a good evening.