The Bible doesn't seem to indicate an elite group of people get to decide who is and isn't "good association". Even if someone is a member of the congregation, whether because there is not enough evidence to oust him or because his misdeeds aren't the type to get him disfellowshipped, that doesn't necessitate him being "good association". Conversely, disagreeing with some arbitrary beliefs promoted by old men in NY which are not well- (or at all) supported in Scripture doesn't necessitate him being "bad association".
The account of removing the man from the congregation in Corinth makes it clear that he was rebuked "by the majority" and not every person. Perhaps they were unaware of the situation and had no reason to shun the man. Without any first-hand information, how much sense does it make to shun someone based purely on the vague say-so of someone else; especially in a situation where some very flimsy reasons which are not supported in Scripture are used to remove people from the congregation?
Thinly disguised under the veil of "unrepentant", the reason people get disfellowshipped is because they don't grovel before the losers in cheap suits. Ultimately, as long as you pay lip-service to repentance and kiss the collective butts of the JC, you can molest children, have sex with animals, commit all sorts of crimes, abuse your wife and kids, etc. without a problem. On the other hand, if the elders call you in because someone has issue with the music you listen to or the clothes you wear and you tell them to mind their own business, that may start you down the road toward being DFed. The worst sin a JW can commit is failure to submit to the hierarchy they deny exists.
There are many in the Hall I see as "bad association" and most are elders. They are idolaters and that is an offence which is clearly identified in Scripture as someone with whom a Christian should not associate. Yet, these are not only allowed to remain in the congregation, but actually promoted to positions of authority over other members of the congregation, to demand similar wickedness from the laity. I believe the strongest statement that can be made would be to begin shunning these "brothers" who openly practice idolatry toward the Society, the Governing Body, and the literature. It would also keep with Scriptural admonition and not allow a double-standard.
Keep in mind, "anyone called a brother" is who shunning is for and once someone is DFed, they're not a brother anymore. Why is nobody shunning the only people they're supposed to, but only those outside, "while God judges those outside"?
