"I am curious as to whether some people who don't want their names out there seek "forgiveness" due to a true need to know that if they hurt someone, they can come to that place with the hurt one, or if it is looked on more as a theory that people wish the "exer community" generally embraced and which would facilitate the non-maintenance of memory that can be accessed."
It all seems to be about the latter.
This is only what I've managed to pick out and understand, based on the approach by LTO and other advocates for letting the family move on and expunging their names from the record.
They act like there is nothing for the repentant FGs to apologize for now that they're so repentant. Just read Jo Anne's posts and how she justifies them. There is no indication the they are seeking specific forgiveness, just a general one at most, with hints of regret, along with a consistent complaint that their names are googleable, and gripes that the policy can't be changed. I would love to be wrong about this, but it just seems that way.
It's coming to a point where if Jo Anne is trying to help, she may be hurting their case more. Because they won't come and speak for themselves, they appear weak and indeterminate. The complaining manner of their advocates belies the FG family's wish to test the waters and see how easy it might be to get a free pass of forgiveness. They act like they're trying to impress their shepherds about their contrite heart. Hey, we've all played that broken-vessel game before, but this is the real world. Deal with the way things are.
Two things then come to mind.
One is the question that has been repeatedly ignored. What exactly are we dealing with?
Two is the straight line the managers of this site have been steering. Kudos to the tough coordinator for insisting on keeping things transparent, for keeping it all real, for insisting there ARE amends to be made, for being mindful of the complexities of such matters, for havingthe wisdom to know they shouldn't try to handle this all on their own.