But the parent is indeed correct in implying that the comments he did make were anything but receptive or conciliatory.
That all makes sense, this isn’t the end of the world, can we just move on, please?
Regarding your question. Mistakes and apologies are words from the lexicon of normal emotional people. Companies, on the other hand, are soulless profit driven maniacs and their lexicon has words justifiable, plausible and profitable. When a company gives an apology, it's because it deems this combination of words the most efficient way to influence its user base and minimize damage (to profits) just done. People who run companies usually embrace this mindset if they want to get rich.
That seems unbelievably unlikely.
Venture capital is quite the opposite of passive investing. I guess everyone on here is well aware investors are not doing it for fun but first and foremost for protecting and, ideally, multiplying their assets.
VCs also like to be able to attract the best founders by being 'founder-friendly' and replacing a founder hurts that image. Starting a company is hard enough - you don't really want investors who add to the pressure.
From what I've heard, COVID seems to have stopped new investments (outside of companies that have gotten a boost from COVID) so that VCs can focus on their existing portfolios.
Isn’t it more likely that he just made a mistake, realized it, and apologized? You can reject the apology, of course, but it doesn’t seem like you have any evidence that it’s not genuine. In fact, the evidence you claim (“classic playbook”) you then invalidate immediately after (“he clearly forgot half the playbook”).
If someone makes a mistake, is there just nothing they can do to ever convince you it was not pure maliciousness? It seems like even an apology is then taken as evidence of ill intent. Why would anyone ever reverse course or apologize under your view?