The kernel's code of conduct, one week later

Understanding why this is so requires considering the context of the claims, as well as possibly reading through the dicussion that followed the claims, or the way he responded to being informed of the way these claims in this context would appear to others.

It's accurate, even if it's not initially obvious.

Given that I come from a small town ( 5000 people ) in which rumors and false accusation spread from thin air and more often than not those rumors and false accusation break relationship,families and scar people for life.

Why is Ted supposed to be sympathetic and why is his credibility in question if he is not the accused in the matter?

Is he not allowed by community members to do his own research,form his own opinions based on his own beliefs and perceptions on these topics as any other, or are individuals perceptions supposed to be fixed on certain topic?

Also is not the TAB supposed to be neither biased or sympathetic to either party but review the facts since they are the judge,jury and potential ( career ) executioners over the accused individual?
( in addition to any maintainer apparently "Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful. )

And what if the individual is falsely accused? What happens to the accusee then?

Will the deciding and enforcing party set the record straight if the accused indvidual is being publicly
executed in the community or on blog post, news article etc?

> It's not as if empathy towards specific individuals and reasonable skepticism about statistics in scientific papers were mutually exclusive. Both are to be encouraged

Yes but maybe not exert the latter *when* the former is expected?