I guess I should have made it clearer by making the implicit explicit:

“The signal isn’t to pay white hats more, instead…”

And perhaps an addendum such as:

“…which will then, indirectly and in the long run, create the signal you were replying to.”

Ah. I don’t have much optimism that companies like Burger King will ever get that 2nd signal (mostly because I don’t think the average consumer-facing business suffers much impact from this kind of incident), but I agree with your premise.

Appreciate your clarification despite the bluntness of my reply.

And I appreciate your reply. It fixes the tone in our little thread and refocuses it on the topic. Thank you.

Also, you’re probably right, the signal will likely pass right over Burger King’s crown.