>Deliberate obfuscation by main actors who want to protect their jobs Sure. There is mal-adaptive behavior, and it's not consequence free. >rarely captures th

>Deliberate obfuscation by main actors who want to protect their jobs Sure. There is mal-adaptive behavior, and it's not consequence free. >rarely captures the truth accurately Accurately? There's nothing going on in your reply to suggest you have distinguished insight to anything. Throwing out three more modalities of problems amounts to what-aboutism. You have attempted to re-contextualize the original write-up as disingenuous something we see a lot of pointless political wrangling. The salient question is what we can agree on as to common failure modes, rather than that argue without intersection. No accounting can be complete, and beyond some level of specificity more detail is useless. We're looking for 20% of the causes that explain 80% of the bad outcomes. Think Chaos Report that had a good run in the 1990s.