To be clear, it is mainly rojo's actions that I take exception with. So, by "you", most of the time I mean Letsrun as a whole or specifically Rojo.
Wejo, on one thread you make the statement that porn shouldn't be allowed to be posted for the community (which I agree with), but then here you are defending the child porn that you put on your site that involves one of the running community's brightest up and comers. Perhaps at first, it was just very unthoughtful mistake. But, at this point, how can you not see that it is part of your campaign to destroy.
I share your opinion about distancing from the Johnsons and Huntington (at least physically) and how that would (will) be favorable for her (running and public perception-wise). However, how can you not see that there are other considerations (her age, where she grew up, family, not to mention simply working through the issues) that makes her situation much different than a pro who was with Salazar but decided to leave. She should be (or have been) afforded time and space before getting railed on. Or, maybe she should not get railed on at all unless testing positive, and she could be treated just like everyone else and viewed with a bit of suspicion. Of course, you know this, but the snuff-her-career-campaign includes voicing how you've contacted potential sponsors, reached out to other high profile runners about her, and talked with the FBI (which is super strange, but that was in rojo's comments last Friday evening that have since been removed).
You are certainly allowed to have your personal opinions (and you (Wejo) are able to voice yours much more diplomatically), but you really should consider your position and status in the running community and on this forum. You are not just any other commenter. You should be 100% certain of things before speaking, or at least make it clear every time when a comment is just your opinion, but something you really don't know.
Sure, throw Nick to the wolves to get all that he deserves (I agree), but then you yourself concede that it may not be fair or ideal of "some people" (ie. you) to seek and destroy anything or anyone associated with him. "Oh wells," you say, "that is how it works." Really!? You don't have an issue with that? If so, you are not close to believing in any "redemption".
Yes, the Wiley threads could be moderated much better so that they don't always go sideways, but the reason they do (outside of moderation) is primarily due to how you've handled this. You implicitly suggest (by the things mentioned above) that you agree (while using a thin veneer of plausible deniability) with trashing Wiley unless she moves somewhere else yesterday. It's not really the fault of the detractors (imo) for dutifully following your lead. At this point, thanks largely to Letsrun, I am very doubtful that her career can ever be fully rehabbed regardless of how she runs, what she does, how clean she may be, or who she actually is as a person. Letsrun has done a great job of doing what it can to define AW in an extraordinarily negative light with assumptions, inuendo, etc despite very little of the problems in Huntington being her fault.