Once you're there, somebody has to swallow their pride and admit their injurious actions. Doesn't necessarily have to be the party most at fault - has to be the party that most wants peace. It still might not work.

Ah, the crux of every apology. Unfortunately, this often results in the person receiving the apology not recognizing that the apology is less about saying, "I harmed you, and I'd like your mercy," and something more closely resembling, "I value our relationship more than I value my pride, so I'd like to do what I can to fix this, starting now." However, a one way apology rarely, if ever, can work, because even in the case when one person clearly wronged another, it's still up to the party who was wronged to accept the apology, explain fully why they reacted the way they did, and to forgive.

Although I didn't follow that thread, and I have no idea what happened there, it's interesting and instructive to have the anatomy of a conflict and the ensuing apology laid out. I think many conflicts could be avoided by clearer explanations of why we're angry or upset in the first place. I'm personally terrible at expressing negative emotions, but mainly that leads to me just getting more upset down the line (sunlight being the best disinfectant and all). Step 1 is next to impossible if you don't know what the specific thing that made the other person upset is. Sometimes we harm each other with the best of intentions in mind. Perspective is impossible in the case when you've not had a shared experience with the other person. Ignorance is only bliss for the ignorant.