adding onto it with how I personally approach this
@robinhood As an addendum to this: it can be hard to distinguish whether someone has changed for the better, or whether they've just gotten better at hiding it.
My personal benchmark for this, that I've found to work quite well: are they 1) acknowledging what they did wrong, and 2) demonstrating an understanding of *why* it is wrong, eg. what harm it has caused?
If someone pretends that the bad thing never happened, or shows no understanding of why it's bad, their promises to do better are not really worth anything; there's no reason to believe that they *will* do better.
But if someone shows that they understand the harm and how to avoid it the next time, they will get the benefit of the doubt from me; when the inputs change, the results are also likely to change.
(I usually overtly state to people that this is my benchmark, and it has spurred some people to actually do the work of understanding the problem and improve, too.)