Here's another, one which Brock has already hinted at on his blog:

"Sam Sloan is a racist bigot. So there's no need to look at the
evidence.


1.Sloan is a racist, among other things. That makes him unfit for
nonprofit Board service, but it certainly doesn't take away his right
to sue for redress. Nor does a plaintiff's racism take away one
defendant's right to note that racism....


2. I also believe that my friend Chris Falter has shown why Mr. Truong
should not be on the Board, either. (No equivalence intended.)

http://christopherfalter.blogspot.co...to-answer.html

Even if Mr. Truong were somehow exonerated in the current matter, my
opinion would not change. I can think of at least two people who
could confirm that I attempted to persuade Susan to drop Paul from the
slate, circa January 2007.


3. I have little respect for people who consciously violate the
privacy of others. If the evidence checks out, it's admissible
AFAIK. But if there was such a violation, those who breached the
trust should lose their positions as well.