3 ms·

> we don't support people who say they made a mistake and are seeking help. > you only end up with really good liars in charge. There's a difference between s

> we don't support people who say they made a mistake and are seeking help. > you only end up with really good liars in charge. There's a difference between someone realizing they've made a mistake and openly admitting it without needing external pressure / evidence versus someone just "handling" more evidence of wrong-doing coming up. In this case, at a cursory glance, it looks more like someone was accused of a negative type of behavior, the person never acknowledged it or resolved it for a long period, then suddenly a series of events followed by video evidence came-up, only then the person acknowledges it and issues an apology and demands/expects to be forgiven. If that's what's happened in this case, then I'm not sure that forgiving them / supporting their subsequent activities is safe since it would be more like enablement, ie: just enabling the person to continue. If on the other hand, the perpetrator acknowledged not just this specific issue that had video evidence, but also acknowledged other issues/faults and gave a plan of action for how they were changing their behavior (more than I'm getting help now), then it would be something positive.

unityByFreedom 10y ago
> There's a difference between someone realizing they've made a mistake and openly admitting it without needing external pressure / evidence versus someone just "handling" more evidence of wrong-doing coming up. I agree there's a difference, I just don't see the value in calling for his head. There's nothing else to expect of him. He clearly wants to stay and keep trying. It's the board's job to decide if he's fit to remain as CEO. > it looks more like someone was accused of a negative type of behavior, the person never acknowledged it or resolved it for a long period, then suddenly a series of events followed by video evidence came-up, only then the person acknowledges it and issues an apology and demands/expects to be forgiven I don't see him expecting anything more from anyone but himself. You may infer that, but it's not written there. I think his message is simple. He wants to remain as CEO and is willing to take steps to improve his leadership style to do so. You may feel those are empty words. To me, they're meaningful because I've read stories of companies that have been transformed by CEOs who become aware how their faults effect the company. It's possible he is not being sincere, but, I don't see much value in wishing for his demise. An in-company replacement would likely keep the same culture going, and an outside replacement isn't reliable in the tech world. As John Sculley showed, that's risky. > If on the other hand, the perpetrator acknowledged not just this specific issue that had video evidence, but also acknowledged other issues/faults and gave a plan of action for how they were changing their behavior (more than I'm getting help now), then it would be something positive. Given the shortness of this apology, I'd guess he isn't quite sure what his other faults are, and is seeking help to identify them.

unityByFreedom 10y ago

> There's a difference between someone realizing they've made a mistake and openly admitting it without needing external pressure / evidence versus someone just "handling" more evidence of wrong-doing coming up. I agree there's a difference, I just don't see the value in calling for his head. There's nothing else to expect of him. He clearly wants to stay and keep trying. It's the board's job to decide if he's fit to remain as CEO. > it looks more like someone was accused of a negative type of behavior, the person never acknowledged it or resolved it for a long period, then suddenly a series of events followed by video evidence came-up, only then the person acknowledges it and issues an apology and demands/expects to be forgiven I don't see him expecting anything more from anyone but himself. You may infer that, but it's not written there. I think his message is simple. He wants to remain as CEO and is willing to take steps to improve his leadership style to do so. You may feel those are empty words. To me, they're meaningful because I've read stories of companies that have been transformed by CEOs who become aware how their faults effect the company. It's possible he is not being sincere, but, I don't see much value in wishing for his demise. An in-company replacement would likely keep the same culture going, and an outside replacement isn't reliable in the tech world. As John Sculley showed, that's risky. > If on the other hand, the perpetrator acknowledged not just this specific issue that had video evidence, but also acknowledged other issues/faults and gave a plan of action for how they were changing their behavior (more than I'm getting help now), then it would be something positive. Given the shortness of this apology, I'd guess he isn't quite sure what his other faults are, and is seeking help to identify them.