I think you misunderstand his word usage, though you're seemingly following the same process.
A "nice problem to have" is one that results from having success. Yes, he doesn't have the problem now, because he's got no users, so indeed, having to reset the passwords of existing users would be a "nice to have" problem.
You're already in the "nice to have" zone (clients with problems to solve!), and you want to fix those problems brought on by popularity.
I am focusing (perhaps too much) on the tense issues. Without tense, "no password reset mechanism", to continue using the same example, represents a problem state.
If something is a problem, it exists in the present.
If something will be a problem, with any contingency or timeline, then by definition it is not yet a problem.
Even in your own phrasing, the tense issue becomes clear:
> Yes, he doesn't have the problem now, because he's got no users, so indeed, having to reset the passwords of existing users would be a "nice to have" problem.
Specifically "... would be a "nice to have" problem." This indicates that it is not a problem, rather that it can become a problem.
I fully agree with everything GP said, by their understanding of what I meant. But yeah, to be useful the question has to be forward looking. Would things have to change for the better for this problem to actually manifest.
That's the crux of it. The headline is catchy, but the author isn't talking about nice-to-have problems. He's talking about recognizing if something is a problem right now, or only a problem at some point in the future.
IMO, the article is click-bait.
The full question I ask is "From my perspective right now, is this a nice problem to have?" - emphasis on the first part.
I certainly didn't mean for this to be click bait, just wanted to share something that's been valuable for me with others in the hope it might be useful. I might work on the title.
This is a great problem to have - lots of pent up demand. Nevertheless, it is a problem, and we must actively strive to solve it. It's nice to have lots of demand, yet if the problem is not solved, we will be giving up future revenue. A larger team will be able to support more revenue than a smaller team.
There is no part of this situation where it is a good idea to slow down on hiring, or to compromise on hiring standards.
Ninja edit: this is in contrast to things that aren't a problem yet. E.g., in the article, the author discusses not having password reset functionality. That is not yet a problem in the absence of users. It's not a nice problem to have. It is not a problem.