> simply having a requirement that several independent people You're asking for government mandated bureaucracy. Here's how I've seen this play out in the cont

> simply having a requirement that several independent people You're asking for government mandated bureaucracy. Here's how I've seen this play out in the context of the world's largest bureaucracy, the Department of Defense. Let's say the law requires someone in a powerful position, like a VP, to approve the un-ban request so you can hold someone "accountable". The following chain of events will occur: 1. The VP will be inundated with un-ban requests and become increasingly annoyed at requests that should obviously remain in effect. 2. The VP will delegate a subordinate to check that each request is sufficiently nuanced to require the full attention of the VP. 3. Repeat steps 1 and 2 until you reach a management level that's too over-burdened to add another review layer. You should have 2-4 layers of review at this point. To properly route a request, each layer queues the request and runs some cheap processing and sends it up the chain where the process repeats. We can borrow some concepts from networking to model this process: - buffer bloat: queues are typically unbounded in the real world. Requests are rarely dropped. Instead they accumulate. - back pressure: the VP goes on vacation. All requests will pile up at the previous layer. - latency: certain days have exceptionally high latency, notably Saturday, Sunday, and most parts of Friday. - network partitions: often the transport layer (usually an intern to shuffle paperwork) will become unavailable as the scheduler (boss) repurposes the intern to higher priority tasks. With a bit of tuning, a well-established bureaucracy can increase latency from minutes to months per request.