QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Wed 6th July 2011, 12:00pm)
Almost everything in the leaked Arbcom communications can be explained by 2 simple principles.
1. If they like you, they will go to great lengths to defend you, and to think well of you, and to credit even the most flimsy and implausible excuses for your otherwise damning conduct.
2. If they don't like you, they will reflexively believe any negative information about you and will continue to hold that belief long after the objective evidence shows the information to be false or misinterpreted. If they don't like you, they will also go to great lengths to avoid taking action against editors that you don't like, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing.
Maybe it's the Arbcom culture, or maybe it's just human nature. It certainly hasn't gotten any better since I left.
Um, since it sounds exactly like standard politics and government, you might guess it's pretty-much human nature. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif)
The advantage of democracy is not that it eliminates this kind of thing. It just makes it not-quite-as-bad as happens with clan feuds, where the idea that "my family member can do no wrong" really causes chaos. And eternal feuds and wars. Which was the natural state of humans for their entire history up to about 2500 years ago when the Greeks started experimenting with other ways of running a goverment (no, the Greeks haven't done much for us lately, ie, for 1500 years, the bums. Talk about running on your laurels-- the Greeks invented that). Later, the Roman Catholics experimented with non-clan government also, with celebacy and meritocracy.
IOW, blood is thicker than water. But to a lesser extent, so are friendships and social networks and "who you know." Even if it's only who you know as electrons on a BBS.
Arbcom's blind spot, My baby's so fresh and he can do no wrong
