The post literally says they are committed to publishing. I understand everyone’s skepticism of it but at least allow the transgression to happen first.
If you listen to the internal discussion meeting, from when that ex-employee left, they indicate that they have disclosure requirements, or more correctly privacy requirements that prevent them from talking about these issues externally. So even a very thorough investigative report will put them in a position where they can’t publish it unredacted, and the redacted version won’t satisfy the public. It’s a catch-22 situation for them. But I’m glad they’re at least going as far down the path as they can. It’ll be impossible to satisfy everyone, and clear the name entirely, or disprove things even. But they’re doing what they can
The post literally says they are committed to publishing. I understand everyone’s skepticism of it but at least allow the transgression to happen first.
If you listen to the internal discussion meeting, from when that ex-employee left, they indicate that they have disclosure requirements, or more correctly privacy requirements that prevent them from talking about these issues externally. So even a very thorough investigative report will put them in a position where they can’t publish it unredacted, and the redacted version won’t satisfy the public. It’s a catch-22 situation for them. But I’m glad they’re at least going as far down the path as they can. It’ll be impossible to satisfy everyone, and clear the name entirely, or disprove things even. But they’re doing what they can