Wild the Painted Dog

and stated I should not rely on the statement from InkedFur. I respected that, but because of the apparent public addressing of the past matter by the owner decided to take a "wait and see" on whether or not to sever the business ties. /5

Earlier this week I was forwarded logs indicating that his public statements were likely false. I then took immediate action, based in no small part on the fact you had contacted me in the past, to make the decision to sever those ties, refunded the prepaid sponsorship out of /6

pocket to do so immediately, and, when you contacted me later that night asking me again to do so, informed you I had done so earlier in the evening. You then thanked me for doing that. A year ago I decided to trust advice I received from a friend and the apparent expression /7

of remorse for past actions by the owner, which he had made publicly and acknowledged to me at the time, and monitor the situation moving forward to determine if it was a genuine change or not. If you hadn't put me on notice a year ago, my current decision may have been /8

very different and been a "Well, let's wait and see." But knowing of your account and the current accusations, I made the decision to sever ties specifically because it was now unquestionable that the owner had decided to present one face publicly and another privately.

Just reading this thread -- in short, you decided to give the guy the benefit of the doubt but keep an eye on it... which seems like a pretty mature position to me? We're all human and we all make mistakes.

Here is a question thats come up again and again on the national sphere: why are we giving known abusers the “benefit of the doubt”?

The same reason that you'd give someone a chance at, say, a furmeet. Because it's incredibly difficult to tell between a "they hate each other" situation and "that guy is dangerous" with only one or two viewpoints.