No worries, thanks for your input.
Personally, I think the board is potentially a fitting place for this kind of guy – if you value their input because they *do* have good ideas, but at the same time you don't want to show him to people too much because he's a creep and a weirdo, keeping him as a board member (not the president anymore) seems like a reasonable move to me.
My understanding is, perhaps wrongly, that he's not exactly in a leadership role anymore, but rather hidden in the back lines where he can still be useful, but not harmful. Limiting his ability to preach and represent FSF may be seen as a punishment, lesson, maybe redemption arc. The fact that everyone is now shocked and pissed off at FSF for secretly reinstating him shows, that he's *not* in a public leadership position anymore – otherwise we wouldn't known a lot sooner.
If that's the case, maybe FSF should swallow this frog and say “yes, he's a creep, he alienates people, that's why we keep him in the closet, in the free software advocacy purgatory”. Yes, it'll be awkward and uncomfortable, but I'd rather assume that is the case than grab my pitchfork and assume that the entire FSF is full of creeps because they're protecting a creep. A fair justice system must allow for redemption and resocialization. Otherwise, what's the end game? Shame and cancel every organization he ever joins?