Well, I am at least gonna name a fraction of the assumptions that are implied by this set of requests. I am not asking you to do anything about this, but I am going to name them out loud, in the hopes that people come away more conscious of what other assumptions might be present.  * Geoff was the center of the problem and, by himself, should be held accountable  * If Geoff agrees to this, he is also agreeing on behalf of Leverage itself, including current members and potentially even past members. Meaning that if not-Geoff people break or violate these commitments, Geoff himself should be held responsible * Geoff has a meaningful degree of control over what other people do or do not do / say or do not say * The people who are scared of retaliation of some kind are mostly afraid of Geoff in particular * People's views of Geoff's willingness and ability to retaliate are basically correct / their fears are justified * The aggrieved parties should put the mass of the blame on Geoff * They should feel better if Geoff agrees to these requests * Geoff is totally free to say "no" to these requests on a public internet forum, and this won't cause a bunch of misunderstanding / assumption of guilt if he does  * Zoe's account is more or less the full picture of what happened * Geoff shouldn't be in a position of leadership  * Geoff is bad in a way that cannot easily be corrected through a postmortem, accountability, or feedback process * Geoff meant ill-will toward individuals or sort-of knowingly abused people or used them for ego-inflating grandiose aims * Geoff knew the basics of Zoe's post / experience (If you or others basically agree that the above list is true, that would be illuminating and help me understand where you're coming from.)  It seems bad that people are scared to talk. I appreciate your and other people's efforts to make it easier for them to make sense of their experience and to process it out loud. I suspect Zoe's account has helped