I don’t need to define “a bit off” because the context here was clear to the players. There was a claim that even if our gedolim tell us someone has lost chezkas kashrus, we should still hold of them because they said so. I added to that from the other side. Just because a person was highly respected, that does not mean they cannot lose that position when they no longer qualify.
You are bringing irrelevent examples as I said that he “said something off”. And i don’t care what other people think of it, I turn to those in position to make the call. You seem so stuck (as in immobile) from the idea that people need to respect all different kinds of opinions and speakers, even if it is heretical or apikorsus, because maybe our leaders really just don’t know the difference and are myopic. Just entertaining that thought indicates that you don’t seem to get the difference between open minded and inappropriate. Maybe it’s your upbringing, or maybe it’s too much time spent revering people who are chipping away at your purity.
“In the latter case, there is some benefit of listening to a T’Ch of a different approach just to appreciate different aspects of Torah, even if you do not plan to subscribe to his views.”
as you have demonstrated, you are under the impression this includes everyone with a yarmulke, who is shomer shabbos and calls themselves orthodox. You believe it is proof that we should be honoring people and ways that are corrosive. You don’t seem to understand that the box this is in (or plastic container if you don’t like boxes) excludes your free thinkers like slifkin and steinsaltz. Same as you laud the Rambam’s secular knowledge because you think it is proof you should go out and do the same. This is a gross misunderstanding of what is going on here.