My particular view on this would have to be the sudden, knee-jerk reaction we pulled from The Professor and his (alleged) lackeys the moment that the name Charles Gellman came into the discussion. The instant that name was evoked, there was a violent lapse in activity followed by the sudden deletion of content en masse on his private forums. A few of the lackeys and/or puppets that have since visited have been loudly decrying against "framing an innocent man" in the fear that we'd be harming some unassuming bystander named Charles Gellman.
My question would have to be why this same response was not garnished from our guesswork directing towards Nikolai Hajrondan, who is obviously not The Professor, given our current evidence. If Nokolai Hajrondan is assuredly not The Professor, then why was the mention of his name not offered the same knee-jerk-style response? Why the vested interest in protecting Charles above Nikolai?