So the first thing that immediately comes to mind, which I don't think will work, is increasing resources.

So for example, could we just hire more programmers to fix more bugs?

More people, we can do more, right?

Isn't it just that simple?

Well, first of all, I just want to say that the team is doing a phenomenal job taking care of all the bugs that they can, and whilst also adding features, I think it's great, and also reducing crunch.

This is something that we...

focus pretty hard on.

We don't want our team to crunch.

We don't think that's a healthy thing for developers to be doing within the industry.

So we don't want to go down that road, right?

So we're just doing what we can do.

Of course, we can hire more people and then we'll have more help, more hands on deck.

And so theoretically, we should be able to solve more issues, right?

However, that doesn't necessarily work out in practice.

Hiring more people does not necessarily solve this problem because as the team size grows, each additional person that we add comes with a bunch of overhead.

There's a popular saying amongst programmers, what one programmer can do in one month, two programmers can do in two months.

or three months, who knows?

And the point of that saying is that the overhead of managing and coordinating additional engineers or other developers of other disciplines can often outweigh the benefit of bringing them on on board in the first place.

And so we can't just add people and the problem goes away.

That's not how it works.

So I don't

Maybe we can add more people and maybe it would be effective, but this is not really a solution that we can rush to.