Oh I completely agree that certain kinds and degrees of hierarchy are or can be more efficient than... absolutely none.

It very much depends on what the organization is attempting to achieve, what its scope and size are.

Generally speaking, you can't really achieve too many complex, specific goals... without some manner of organizing your endeavor.

It sounds like, to me at least, you actually do grasp this better than you think you do, realizing that this is actually a complex topic with many potential variables at play.

You wanna learn a martial art?

How to shoot a gun?

Yeah, a fairly strict, top down, rigid hierarchy with strict rules probably makes more sense, because the potential downsides of 'crowd sourcing' the learning experience could be literally fatal, and these things are usually done at the scale of 5, 10, 20 people in a class.

But, if you scale that exact same structure all the way up to an entire military, you end up with WW1 style shit where entire divisions are thrown into advancing through a friendly artilery barrage due to poor timing or a delayed message, the overall commander being overwhelmed, the rigidity of strict top down adherence to all orders from superiors and fear of insubordination leading to massive catastrophic self inflicted losses.

Conversely, a very, very poorly coordinated set of guerrilla warfare style, totally autonomous allied fighting forces... might accidentally end up ambusing each other, or each cell decides to attack the same percieved enemy vulnerability at the same time, and then all point fingers at each other when they realize no one is now defending some critical asset or area, which has now been captured or destroyed.

For a business endeavor... very similar dynamics can play out.

Maybe far too much management leads to nothing actually getting done, or even worse, dramaticly expensive projects that end up being a barely functional mess, because everyone is spending more time in meetings than working, constantly having their work and project scope changed, altered, amended...

Or maybe there is too little direction, and everyone is doing neat cool pet projects, but the critical underlying business processes are being neglected or overwhelmed.

It is always a balancing act.

If you have a more lateral, more horizontal org structure... those individual units or components need to be more independently capable, which can be more costly than a more streamlined structure, but it can also be more resilient and flexible overall.

And there probably does still need to be some kind of mechanism for coordinating the overall actions of the units/components.

You've also got the whole dynamic of... does your org structure actually promote people to positions of more relative responsibility and power... via merit and actual competency?... or does it just reward sycophantic ass kissers, or self serving, machiavellian behind the scenes manipulators?

Or, if you have a more diffuse, flat, democratic 'power structure'... does it spend all of its time debating things and not actually doing anything? or does it have some method of internally regulating that problem?

General best practice for viewing modlogs:

Go to the actual instance's website and view their own modlog.

That's why I provided the link to it my post a couple levels up. Sometimes silly stuff can happen if you don't do it that way.

Also, for what its worth, I'm not the one throwing the single downvote on these more recent comments between us.