I think the issue is that many (most?) posters can't understand how this decision could have ever been made in the first place and how could it have been so strongly defended? It speaks to some sort of fundamental disconnect about what is acceptable handling of user data and privacy. This naturally leads to mistrust about less visible policies that are in place or will be created. What decisions have been made in the past and/or will be made in the future that are less visible to users that will similarly abuse users personal data? I think everyone appreciates the apology very much, but the unfortunate truth is that this business requires trust and this debacle has eroded that trust in a way that can't be quickly repaired by a simple mea culpa.

It seems convenient to be clueless. Certainly makes for a better apology than "Of course I knew the issue but wanted to try to push it through."

To me it doesn't seem credible that you as the CEO of a recruiting company didn't realize the issue of "default public" profiles. You literally have a section about confidentiality on the front page of your website so you must have known it was important to users.

I'm just as upset as the next guy, but it's a bit silly to presume that he knew how bad this would be. If that were the case, even if he were a greedy, evil, selfish bastard, he wouldn't have rolled out the feature because he would understand the backlash.

Users are obviously not the customer, and recruitment business is shady in itself, sadly. No wonder.

Why did it take friends and mentors reaching out when hundreds of users had already been telling you the same on Friday?

I don't have a great answer. I guess just an entrenched/combative view of what was going on? I'm not proud of it.

It is because he thinks he is above us, who listens to the cows when you sell milk.

If you are that clueless you shouldn't be running a company.