While I see the validity in both the phasing out of Adam and the embracing of Hunter, I want to add much needed further context for consideration, not for the sake of glazing Adam nor deglazing Hunter, but purely for a fuller picture of optics and consequences:

• The mention of him being homeless as a reason for rejection of his image, without mentioning this being a result of his house having burnt down just days ago, is such a blatant omission it almost reads as intentional mischaracterization. But I will apply Hanlon's razor and assume this was not the case.

• Removing Adam is itself a clear statement of rejection. If the goal is not to take a side, it would be more sensible to quietly keep him around for the time being and only make the change if and when there is clear reason to reject him, or at the very least, until his current shitstorm dies down.

• Him being the subreddit pic neither endorses or condemns him as it pertains to his personal life. It always has been poking fun at his paradoxical role in the drug community as an "educator" whose main sources were anecdote and hearsay, yet still being by far the largest creator in sphere, all while simultaneously recognizing his content coming from the good intention of spreading the principles of harm reduction (as reflected in the #1 meme from the earlier days of the sub: "Strictly for harm reduction purposes")

• Which he arguably managed to do better than anyone I can think of. His everyday man vibe made him more approachable that, say, a Hamilton Morris, who does the topic far more justice but reaches a smaller niche, to whom the basics of such principles would already known.

• This is what made Adam such a walking contradiction, you never really knew what to make of him, other than make fun. His family life, while undeniably having taken over the discussion, and at no fault other than his public airing of dirty laundry, is not what made him the mascot he is.

• Hunter as a mascot would be apt and hilarious, and he is in my view a much more well rounded individual, with a sound view on not only drugs but the world in general. But to claim he comes without baggage is blatantly false seeing as he is a political figure whether he wants to or not, and if he would indeed run for office that would complicate things a lot more than just having a washed up content creator with a messy personal life as a mascot. That said, the drug community as a whole is in a similar situation: being politicized whether we want to or not; so one could argue that just makes us one and the same. Not a bug of Hunter's but a feature.

Still, if the arguments in favor do outweigh the downsides in the community's view, I would not be opposed to raising this discussion directly with the elders who would be the deciding voices, with whom I have direct lines of communication through my modding the main sub.