If someone is a mass murderer, there should be evidence beyond reasonable doubt that he repented for it. That's my position. Maybe not so theologically elaborate, but I do they saints venerated by the church should be models for the faithful.
I'm pretty sure I can't answer this accusation without dragging this thread into politics, so...
I think you and I largely agree.
To clarify: I'm not saying I think each and every Orthodox Christian must personally pray to or kiss the icon of each and every canonized saint. I'm not even saying you have to particularly like every saint. But there is something that rubs me the wrong way about obstinately holding the opinion that a saint is not in fact a saint and proclaiming that to the world.
I'm new to Orthodoxy, and so it's possible that I'm wrong, and if there's a council or a canon or a tradition or a precedent or something that allows the opposition to the veneration of canonized saints or defines the Church's power to canonize in a way that makes such opposition make sense, I'd like to see it.
Maybe I don't really know what "canonization" is in Orthodoxy, so I am open to correction, but:
When, if ever, according to those who refuse to venerate St. Nicholas II, is a saint finally and definitively a saint? What good is it to have a Church that proclaims saints if we can all just ignore Her rulings?