The weaker road is to circle the wagons, my friend.  Because someone seems good at something excuses criminal behavior through systematic harassment, intimidation, threats and attempted endangerment the lives of others?  I think not.  We should forget because of the slap on the wrist in San Quentin?  I doubt it.  But you would let him off the hook and forget about it, it&#x27;s unimportant.  Riight.  That sort of behavior bleeds over because it makes a person a liability, rendering them untrustworthy for anything significant.  Jeremy Clarkson was handled appropriately, Macy was not.  As further evidence, I know of at least five (5) startups whom passed on about a dozen seemingly technical badasses for being too arrogant... capable but unable to mesh with various ventures.  In a word: hubris.  If a community&#x27;s leadership doesn&#x27;t consistently defend boundaries of civility, it&#x27;s not going to endure because teams are fragile and cofounder&#x2F;early participant squabbles kill more ventures&#x2F;projects than anything else.  Someone like that must prove beyond measure that they have changed, especially when others think no one&#x27;s watching... Or they&#x27;re just playing society for fools, again.<p>(The five startups all found exceptionally smart <i>and nice</i> early employees, and four of them exited in 7-8 figure territory.  One combined with amother startup and pivoted.)