5 ms·
There has been a lot of comments bashing Arash's response. His post certainly wasn't personal (and should have had a more apologetic tone), but beyond that what
by g0atbutt 15y ago
There has been a lot of comments bashing Arash's response. His post certainly wasn't personal (and should have had a more apologetic tone), but beyond that what would you've liked to see him communicate? He seemed to do a good job explaining what happened and outlined a plan moving forward.
I'm not trying to defend him but I am genuinely curious what other people think his response was missing.
- random42 15y ago1. The tone MUST have been apologetic. 2. The error is presented like casual news. Sort of downplaying the incident and not acknowledging that they screwed up. If the accounts were freely accessible for 4 odd hours, it is pretty serious. 3. No actual details of bug introduced were provided. 4. The communication was done on blog, and emails were not send. Again, it is an attempt to downplay the incident.
- Angostura 15y agoBut he specifically said that e-mails would be sent to accounts accessed during the bug period. Seems reasonable to me.
- albedoa 15y agoSo, to take it to one extreme, you think that if zero accounts were accessed, then it would be reasonable for zero users to be directly notified about this? That doesn't sound reasonable in the least bit.
- kwis 15y agoSome people might also be concerned that the note about sending emails wasn't added to the post until after there was mass outrage at the lack of notification. Makes it feel very inauthentic, as though they were really hoping they'd be able to sweep it under the rug.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]