But out of the things he could have learned, which ones would make for a good public apology? If he goes public, and says - "I honestly apologize for my mistake, I never realized you people could so violently overreact to what's essentially politely expressed feasibility comment backed by scientific consensus, and that in the process you'll so maliciously misrepresent me and lie about my intentions and the contents of my memo" - how will that sound to the crowd? Because that's what his mistake really was - not realizing he's not dealing with rational people.

That's not an apology, that's being a passive-aggressive nerd.

That's exactly my point. I can't imagine any way of him saying the truth about the memo situation that wouldn't also sound passive-aggressive at best.

just do what politicians do. apologize as vaguely as possible without calling yourself wrong.

"Mistakes were made, and I want to move on with my life....", no details -- just pandering. He won't necessarily be dishonest if he limits the context of the apology.

(I don't think one should apologize for opinions and ideas that go un-enacted. Knee-jerk reactions to opinions you don't like tend to blow them up, and that's why James Damore is a name we recognize now. Isn't that opposite to everyone's intention of minimizing his point of view? Ironic.)

Does that even work, though? We all comment critically here when we see politicians or company CEOs pulling fake-apologies. But since fake-apologies happen, I guess they must be buying the performers something...

I bet it would work in a smaller setting, like a hiring interview where the scandal came up. It wouldn't be worth doing something like now and in public while there's attention on him.

The key is to be sincere. A fake apology would be a terrible idea.