[toomuchtodo]

I would encourage you to accept that their post mortem was released in good faith, and its purpose is to both technical knowledge sharing as well as PR. I know I personally value technical organizations that are honest and forthcoming when things go south.

[manigandham]

> I know I personally value technical organizations that are honest and forthcoming when things go south.

Why? How does the honesty (in this case openness really) change the quality?

Genuine question: Would you rather have an org that's always reliable but private in their tech or one that has issues but open about them?

[icelancer]

The second. Because "always reliable" isn't. So when something goes down and there is nothing being communicated, that's truly infuriating.

[manigandham]

This particular post-mortem by Stripe makes me trust them less as it's a fairly simple mistake that shouldn't have been made.

Plenty of companies also communicate the status and that something is happening but don't fully expound on all the internal details. Not sure why it's such a big difference if they did. It feels like fake PR trust to me.

[toomuchtodo]

> This particular post-mortem by Stripe makes me trust them less as it's a fairly simple mistake that shouldn't have been made.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. I don't think its going to hurt their business at all.

[manigandham]

Didn't say it was going to hurt their business. Only that a post-mortem doesn't somehow change my opinion on their quality or reputation, and in this case is the opposite.