::::: For the sake of argument lets call the sides "real names" versus "anons" (I know a couple of exceptions exist). Specifically I do not see more group behaviour or bad behaviour on the "real names" side than on the "anon side". You can choose to see either side as pack animals or individuals and get as good a fit with what we see. Both have lots of faults but no I do not see the tactics of Kim or WMC as worse than the baiting of those trying to move the articles off centre or WMC into trouble. The only thing which may be worse is not the crime but the culpability because the real names are much more established editors and should be more self aware. But in my mind that's offset by the much greater project contribution in general. And the way forward? Build relationships which each one as a person and don't try to box them.