Baseball in the collective has a decision. They can either look the other way, or they can say what Bonds did was wrong.
What I won't tolerate is something along the lines of "Well, Barry Bonds maintains his innocence, blah, blah, blah."
There comes a point that even without an admission from Bonds, a reasonable person comes to the conclusion that Bonds used steroids - intentionally.
Based on what I have read about Bonds in the past, he should NOT be a first ballot Hall of Fame inductee. He intentionally used steroids in a manner to enhance his performance, and attempted to hide that fact.
Bonds has been rude, belligerent, and/or unavailable to the media for the better part of his career. The ballots for the Hall of Fame are cast by human beings (writers) rather than by some computerized formula. Since Bonds has gone out of his way to be as nasty as possible to virtually everyone he has ever met, particularly sportswriters, it is doubtful that he would receive the requisite 75% of votes necessary to get into the Hall, on the first ballot or on any subsequent ballot. All the writers need is a plausible excuse not to vote for him. Clearly, the steroid issue is more than sufficient.
Of course, Mark McGwire is eligible first (2007) and if he gets in, despite an obvious steroid issue, it will be more difficult to deny entry to Bonds. McGwire's personality is the polar opposite of Bonds', and his respect for Roger Maris and for the game's history will certainly help his cause. Likeability can never be overlooked when human beings are doing the voting.