> Make them 10% less blunt.

That’s… Not how communication works.

> Have they become realistic? No? OK, another 10% less blunt. Keep going until it seems realistic. Does it still show true remorse? No? Quelle surprise!

What a bizarre straw man. You invent an argument unrelated to what the other person said, then argue with yourself pretending to know what the other person would respond ultimately making the imaginary opponent agree with you. That’s quite something.

Your post is so far removed from the point of the thread I have no idea how to respond to it. Nor would I want to, I believe this has gone so far off the rails there’s no salvaging it.

Again, I’m not defending Mozilla. Anyone who cared to find my other comments on the thread can easily verify I defended Raymond Hill from the start. The one thing I was interested in with the original question were serious arguments of what Mozilla could have done better. Straw man arguments lacking in empathy that makes everyone on the other side look like clowns are unproductive.