Maybe, I do agree it's warranted to call out bad behavior and impose some penalty on said behavior to discourage it. After all, this "feedback" has elicited a r

Maybe, I do agree it's warranted to call out bad behavior and impose some penalty on said behavior to discourage it. After all, this "feedback" has elicited a response here at least. But I worry that: A) It misses the bigger picture and thus doesn't address the underlying cause, thus it will continue to happen over and over. and B) It feeds an outrage culture that permeates far too much of our online conversation that requires more nuance and careful dissection, which paired w/ the first leads to division and us vs them mentalities when more than ever we mentalities are needed. Perhaps I'm overly sensitive to that second one because I'm more focused on systems and because outrage culture, which itself is bourn of other misaligned incentives, is a large problem underlying other issues that I've tended to notice more in my circumstantial isolation. So in a sense I'm being hypocritical when I plead for a more measured and forgiving response as I'm addressing individuals not the systems that caused them to react in this way. Mostly I'm just thinking out loud, as are we all (we're thinking at each other rather than with each other, another issue, related to outrage culture). Anyway, as I'm in danger of severely incoherent rambling here I'll circle back to say I cautiously agree with you that some measure of pitchfork waving is warranted. But when the CEO makes a response like this, at least on its face an earnest effort to right past wrongs, can't we at least give them a chance to do so? Otherwise the pitchforks lose their meaning as it begins to look like they were out just to be out, and we're more concerned with persecution than actual redemption or resolution.