Did they actually establish a clear pattern of malfeasance? To me, a DevOps dude, it seems like they simply did not pay attention to security and privacy and focused on making features as easy to use as possible. Many security experts will tell you that security is all about trade offs between convenience and privacy. Zoom went to market basically only focused on convenience and now that the whole world is using the platform they have all eyes on their products.

It doesn't seem like anything they did warrants "Blood Sacrifice", and it doesn't seem like anything they did was criminal negligence. Security incompetence? Yes certainly, but lets be real, 99% of companies would fail under the same security scrutiny if the company suddenly had 190 million more users using their same product over night. Aren't you at least glad their CEO cares enough to address these issues? Its not like Facebook drastically addressed their users privacy issues, even with intense scrutiny over the last few years. The situation with Zoom could be much much worse. They definitely have some more work to do, and we should keep holding them accountable, but since I am forced to use Zoom for work, I'm glad they're even pretending to take these issues seriously.

While I agree that we can't continually forgive them for intentional behavior, I think you need to, at the very least, acknowledge that what they were trying to do, albeit poorly, was to limit the interaction needed from the end-user to make their product seamless when someone clicks a link. To go from there to being a tool of worldwide necessity and critique in a matter of weeks is unfair, in my opinion. It wasn't incompetence so much as it was something that worked and wasn't a big issue when they were just a small link in a chain. It's important now but that doesn't mean that the response is blood sacrifice. That's just as bad as the knee-jerk cancel culture that's everywhere.