While I appreciate the creative energy and output of the no name writer of the article, the article lists only a few circumstantial points that can easily be explained away, with no smoking gun. Without real proof, it comes off as a hit piece on a guy who ran a 3:11 in some marathon somewhere, who has no obligation to prove anything to the writer, whoever he or she is, or to this kangaroo court. If you're going to call a man a cheater in this big of a way, then you really should have real proof.
Each person who posts here should hope that someday they don't come under the crosshairs of the unnamed writer and this finger-pointing mob and feel you have to prove your innocence, when the onus is and always should be on the accusers.