Is that a thing? Like there's some non-apology Bingo card you can fill out? I don't see a connection between the criteria you listed and genuine-vs-false contrition.

You may perceive these things one way, but ultimately you can't know the minds of others well enough to tell if they are sincere or not about anything. You don't get to just declare yourself the arbiter of their feelings because they used "any" instead of "the".

https://www.google.com/search?q=non+apology+bingo

I would expect it to be there and would minimize attempts to marginalize my apology with direct, precise, and inclusive language.

For every word created or omitted to those ends, the number of negative comments will be reduced.

Fact is people take it how they take it and feel what they feel.

There really is no "can't" in any of that.

...which is why the consistent feedback to those ends is here in the discussion.

How else is this to be done and be meaningful, not easily gamed?

Serious question.

I tend to have pretty dry affect at certain hours of the day, which has caused considerable frustration for myself and others when I know I'm sincere but they don't. Nor does it make much sense to me for that sort of mind-reading to take place democratically. What do we then gain from it?

At best, you get an apology for a misunderstanding over the previous apology, plus a second draft that the masses might like better. Then you still get that lingering contingent that says "you just did that to placate people! Now we really know you don't mean it!"

The cultural apparatus for "Saving Face" is completely broken on a build failure for missing dependencies.