This isn't about a parasocial relationship with Krebs at all, but determining how he'll avoid the situation again going forward. > So like, what do you want?

This isn't about a parasocial relationship with Krebs at all, but determining how he'll avoid the situation again going forward. > So like, what do you want? I think I've been pretty clear, basically an acknowledgement of the situation and a statement that he has some ideas on how to address it from coming again. I'm not even asking for an in-depth process update, I realize why he might want to be vague. Importantly, I just want to make sure he sees the problem. Otherwise, what stops it from happening again? > What more should he say? You say "maybe he sees the facts differently" as if we as anonymous internet crowds are entitled to a post-mortem on his psychological state. I'm certainly not entitled to his mental state, he's free to remain as private as he'd like. To go back to my original point, I said "[how he] has handled this whole episode has not inspired optimism in how he'll handle future mistakes." So to answer your question, all I'm saying is if he wants to be seen as a trustworthy public security researcher that is a step he can take in service of it. If he wishes to remain private on it he can too, but as he's decided to be a public security researcher I think it's only fair to engage with that. And I think it's off the mark to call it parasocial, when I'm only engaging with him as a public security researcher doing security work.