I have rarely seen a balanced pair of opposing cabals. One side usually wins out, at least on individual articles. > watching like a hawk for their opponents t

I have rarely seen a balanced pair of opposing cabals. One side usually wins out, at least on individual articles. > watching like a hawk for their opponents to make errors they can correct This is a very idealistic view of how these battles are actually fought. Just settling for correcting the opposing side's errors would be very magnanimous. In reality, cabals usually try to get the opposing cabal's editors banned. The types of errors they look out for are violations of editing rules. Usually, both cabals are in violation of the rules, so it's really a question of which side is more effective at gaming the system. It's very common for both sides to try to bait their opponents into violating the 3-revert rule, for example. Once one side wins, they can do pretty much anything with the article. Most articles about controversial subjects end up under the control of one side or another.