I'm sorry
&quot;Sorry I opened a PR and merged it without discussion&quot; is not an honest description of what happened (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;reactiveui&#x2F;splat&#x2F;pull&#x2F;778" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;reactiveui&#x2F;splat&#x2F;pull&#x2F;778</a>), and therefore the apology seems very insincere.<p>You can&#x27;t apologize and at the same time minimize the thing you actually did. It&#x27;s pretty much like ending your apology with a &quot;but&quot;. And this (not really) apology is a big &quot;but&quot;.<p>More to the point though, this apology attempt made it worse. It starts off with a dishonest apology, and then goes into a big policy and contract debate.<p>Why would you conflate the two? Whatever point you&#x27;re then trying to make about policy and ownership is tainted by both the personal misstep (I call it that unsarcastically) and by the insincere apology.<p>It&#x27;s needlessly ineffective.<p>1. It makes your apology sound like &quot;I&#x27;m sorry, but I&#x27;m the dictator here&quot;
2. It starts you off from a position of &quot;I was wrong, admit I was wrong, but here&#x27;s how actually I&#x27;m right&quot;<p>It&#x27;s going to be hard convincing anyone if you start from a position of being wrong. And not just wrong but also really rude.<p>It seems to me that it would be much more effective to just apologize for the obvious process mis-step and arrogant rudeness (it happens to the best of us), and let that sink in. And then start a new conversation about policy.<p>Whoever raises &quot;yeah, well weren&#x27;t you the one who went around PR policies?&quot; in that thread will be the unproductive one, and it won&#x27;t go anywhere.<p>As-is the policy points can&#x27;t be taken at face value.