But consider the actual meaning of that - an editor endorsing a comment that misrepresented both policy, and what an arbitrator said - this is serious. At the time of endorsement, they were unaware that there was any misrepresentation and assumed that administrators can make decisions on content (whether out of ignorance, or not actually knowing - the actual policy pages have been unclear or contradictory). Even the talk page shows clear instances of this misinterpretation.