Toxic in what way? It's OK for the CEO to publicly fly off the handle expecting this to go away due to his big stick he now wields because he's successfully leveraged the work of giants to his own fortune?
A gracious response? No. His apology was not an apology at all. His apology can be distilled down to: "I'm sorry, but I'm still right - and I'm only sorry because the community has called me on it."
toxic in the sense of appropriateness. your response isn't crazy, but as a response to some one graciously accepting critical feedback it doesn't make much sense. frankly a top level post would have been more appropriate.
I think the specific idea at play here is that people should be able to apologize, or at least acknowledge some one criticizing them, without that becoming an avenue for attack.
I mean, do you want to participate in a scenario where the only rational response is to simply not engage?
I've been around a while and I've found that it's rather rare a person will try to intimidate or belittle a person on the same day they have an epiphany of their own failings all without external influence. In this situation the CEO is forced to confront perspective that isn't aligned with his. He's got two options at this point: the first is to acknowledge where he made mistakes and truly apologize the second is damage control - I think he attempted the latter. When you look through his history his apology is exactly as I described. His intention is to squash both problems while leaving the door open to an end game his lawyer(s) have counselled him on, potentially after the scrutiny subsides.
Also, my intention of responding in line was appropriate in my opinion. The parent to the CEOs comment was very well defined. The CEO made reference to it being good advice. In my opinion publicly acknowledging good advice without following through on it seems hypocritical. That's my opinion.
Finally, appropriateness seems to be an odd argument given all of the public inappropriateness from the CEO directly. The CEO has had many openings to right his wrong at this point, yet has not seemed to have been able to bring himself to execute on that.
He read the feedback (or at least replied) 3 hours ago. Give him time. Hopefully he’s acknowledging that comment well and we will be hearing from him again soon.
Let's be honest here... Failure to talk to someone about it and then being forced by publicity to do so - is forced, thus inherently disingenuous.
With the backdrop of publicity - I just don't buy the apology. Maybe next time Amjad will be better, but now - he's on the hook.
Toxic in what way? It's OK for the CEO to publicly fly off the handle expecting this to go away due to his big stick he now wields because he's successfully leveraged the work of giants to his own fortune?
A gracious response? No. His apology was not an apology at all. His apology can be distilled down to: "I'm sorry, but I'm still right - and I'm only sorry because the community has called me on it."
Toxic? Or warped perception?
toxic in the sense of appropriateness. your response isn't crazy, but as a response to some one graciously accepting critical feedback it doesn't make much sense. frankly a top level post would have been more appropriate. I think the specific idea at play here is that people should be able to apologize, or at least acknowledge some one criticizing them, without that becoming an avenue for attack. I mean, do you want to participate in a scenario where the only rational response is to simply not engage?
I've been around a while and I've found that it's rather rare a person will try to intimidate or belittle a person on the same day they have an epiphany of their own failings all without external influence. In this situation the CEO is forced to confront perspective that isn't aligned with his. He's got two options at this point: the first is to acknowledge where he made mistakes and truly apologize the second is damage control - I think he attempted the latter. When you look through his history his apology is exactly as I described. His intention is to squash both problems while leaving the door open to an end game his lawyer(s) have counselled him on, potentially after the scrutiny subsides.
Also, my intention of responding in line was appropriate in my opinion. The parent to the CEOs comment was very well defined. The CEO made reference to it being good advice. In my opinion publicly acknowledging good advice without following through on it seems hypocritical. That's my opinion.
Finally, appropriateness seems to be an odd argument given all of the public inappropriateness from the CEO directly. The CEO has had many openings to right his wrong at this point, yet has not seemed to have been able to bring himself to execute on that.
He read the feedback (or at least replied) 3 hours ago. Give him time. Hopefully he’s acknowledging that comment well and we will be hearing from him again soon.
Unfortunately the crowd has turned into a mob... not the first time we’ve seen this. Wait for the cooldown and hire a PR professional.
Is it just or unjust to over-react to a gross over-reaction?