|>>|| No. 25040
>We are always honest, but we just choose to put it forward in a way that covers us too.
No, you're not. Taking the situation and framing it differently so as to absolve yourself of responsibility is probably stretching the definition of "honest". Issuing a statement loaded with "alternative facts" can't even remotely be called honest.
>Is it realistic to expect a company to make a mistake and just throw our hands up and go 'you got us, come fuck us over?'.
I don't think it's entirely unrealistic to expect you to throw your hands up and at the very least say "yes, we made a mistake, our bad".
>The same way you wouldn't turn up in court for a parking ticket and tell the judge that actually you were driving faster ten minutes before you got caught.
No, that's an entirely different situation. Let me correct your analogy for you:
>The same way you wouldn't turn up in court for a parking ticket and tell the judge that actually you weren't even driving that day and you don't even own a car.
>It's weird though, most big, modern companies these days actually have an honesty policy where it's seen better to come clean
Shame they don't seem to bother enforcing them, eh?
>just because we don't self-flagellate at how shit we are doesn't mean we are trying to absolve ourselves completely.
Because those are the only options, aren't they? Either lie through your teeth and deny all responsibility, or grovel for your life. There clearly isn't any middle ground there such as, say, admitting that you got it wrong and moving on. Nope, it's got to be one extreme or the other.
>It's like you have only just entered the real world. I can't fathom why somebody would think a company would want to give itself a bad reputation.
Yet they somehow manage to do so by issuing non-apology apologies and denying that they could ever have possibly done anything wrong.