71–80 of 678 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They didn’t miss anything, they just weren’t able to get away with it.
They could get away with but just charging forward despite the backlash. To me, that puts them at least in the middle Malicious Meh Respectful
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My head was still in the place it was when we were developing the feature. I thought it was a communication problem (if I could only communicate how this feature could help a lot of people everyone would understand). Perhaps I'm just slow. But it took some time and repetition for the magnitude of my error to sink in and me to really hear what people were saying.
If you don't already have one, have you considered having a collection of users who you can privately ask about potential features (or run email wording by) to figure out how it would go over? A user of the product could easily have told you, in advance, "some people are looking for a job secretly and this would be a problem". You could also come up with incentives to encourage job seekers to opt in; for instance, yo…
Who has accessed the data already? Not only directly but indirectly as well? Have you received any compensation or settled any transactions by exposing the data?
One of the first things they could do is stop with the dark patterns. The original thread had many people mentioning that deleting an account was a ridiculous process, with a 30-day delay once you managed to start it.
"We're processing your request and should be done within 30 days.
We will verify your request using the information associated with your account. Government identification may be required and we may ask you for more information in order to verify your identify.
Any questions? Email us at privacy@triplebyte.com"
They didn't need "government identification" when I signed up for it. Never going back to this site again.
I am not an active Triplebyte user, but I have an account and followed the thread(s). This e-mail (which I also got) seems like a heartfelt apology. They fucked up, realized it and turned the ship around. They listened and that's what counts for me. They listened to the negative feedback and responded to it. Some comments around here are extremely negative of the whole situation. More negative than I think they deser…
One question that wasn’t addressed in the response: if the CEO did not realize that implementing the feature would be bad for users, then why did the company announce the feature as an email footnote at 5PM Friday before a holiday weekend, which is when bad news typically drops?
The Friday announcement was a result of us pushing to get the profile toggle feature out that the email linked to, and shipping late. Not something I'm proud of (either from an eng management perspective, or, more importantly, from a not violating the trust of our users perspective). It was a rushed schedule. In hindsight I see that the timing of the Friday announcement is ALSO a problem.
The absolute most important part of the feature was a last-minute addition?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if I could only communicate how this feature could help a lot of people everyone would understand I don't mean to flog a dead horse, but you seem to be intent on digging a deeper and deeper hole. It's not for you or anyone else to make someone's data public without their consent, because you think it helps them. > and me to really hear what people were saying Nobody should need to tell you any of this. If it truely…
I think you've missed the point ... that parenthetical comment is what was previously in his mind, he's sharing with us why he was, at that time, still pushing and defending. I don't see this in any way as still digging the hole. As for the rest of your comment, you seem purely to be repeating what he says he now knows. Although others have, I haven't downvoted you, but it feels like you're still being angry about wh…
I'm not still angry about what the situation was - I believe the only reason this feature was rolled back is because there was a big backlash. I really believe his whole attitude towards other people's data means he isn't responsible enough to store it.
It's exactly irresponsible moves like this that led to the GDPR in the first place (something else contravened by this feature)
One of two things happened: 1. Triplebyte attempted a big move against LinkedIn, tried to ease the blow to users by dumping on a Friday before memorial day weekend 2. Triplebyte, the company built around helping people find jobs, truthfully didn't understand that people might have concerns about their current companies knowing they are job-hunting It's pretty obvious it's #1, and that opt-out rather than opt-in was t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Some comments around here are extremely negative of the whole situation. More negative than I think they deserve People would have gotten laid-off to this. The dark patterns are just cherry on top. The negativity is well deserved.
The negativity towards to original announcement of making profiles public was deserved. For me, the negativity towards the CEO's apology and cancelling the feature is not. Everyone makes mistakes and if nobody would be willing to look past that, then we'd never get anywhere.
And it would have gone over a lot better if he was honest about what happened. He got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and he's all "was that wrong? Should I not have done that?". They knew exactly what they were doing and calculated that it was worth it.
> Nor in the critic let the man be lost
> Good-nature and good sense must ever join;
> To err is human, to forgive, divine.