[teejers1]

I'd vote yes on the PED guys for the HoF, chiefly because the era was rife with PED-using players. If it was just one or 1/2 dozen players, then I'd say no, keep them out.  But it was over 100 players (at least) who used PEDs, according to the special report.  I'd give special HoF consideration to players like Will Clark and Jeff Kent who played clean in a dirty era (in my view Clark doesn't make it, Kent does).

Thanks for asking.  Always happy to answer.

Same.

Make all wanting to be considered to baseball HoF take a lie detector test.  No test; no eligibility.
Ask them, in _____ did you use steroids or PEDs while playing that baseball season?  Repeat for every year of player's career.

Make info known.  Then vote on players' credentials.

Imperfect?  Absolutely. 

Invasion of privacy?  Nah.  Induction into HoF is not some constitutional right.

At least in this scenario the voters would be voting on candidates with better information than they have now.

[teejers1]

I'd vote yes on the PED guys for the HoF, chiefly because the era was rife with PED-using players. If it was just one or 1/2 dozen players, then I'd say no, keep them out.  But it was over 100 players (at least) who used PEDs, according to the special report.  I'd give special HoF consideration to players like Will Clark and Jeff Kent who played clean in a dirty era (in my view Clark doesn't make it, Kent does).

Thanks for asking.  Always happy to answer.

Same.

Make all wanting to be considered to baseball HoF take a lie detector test.  No test; no eligibility.
Ask them, in _____ did you use steroids or PEDs while playing that baseball season?  Repeat for every year of player's career.

Make info known.  Then vote on players' credentials.

Imperfect?  Absolutely. 

Invasion of privacy?  Nah.  Induction into HoF is not some constitutional right.

At least in this scenario the voters would be voting on candidates with better information than they have now.