It’s been observed that subcultures have this problem where conflicts within the subculture tend to devolve into popularity contests, even if they’re officially someone else. Everyone involved may claim they’re taking a principle stand, but somehow the more popular person ends up crushing the less popular person the vast majority of the time. This is well-known, but I don’t think people pay enough attention to why this happens.
Having observed such conflicts play out a few times, a common thread seems to be: “I know S. S is a good person. S would never do the thing they’ve been accused of.” But this reasoning so often produces the wrong result. Well-liked people very often behave in ways that don’t match the image they’ve cultivated. How much you like someone is a poor predictor of how ethically they’ll behave.
I predict that many people will read this post and simply take for granted that it’s obvious. And next time they see a conflict within their subculture, they’ll remember it… and then think, “except in this case, I really do know they’re extremely ethical, and couldn’t possibly have done this thing…”