Forgive my "bashing," but hear me out...
Ed Williams said:
And, on top of all that, they're all failed writers with huge chips on their shoulders.
They are failed writers who are mightily trying to attract other "failed" writers "with huge chips on their shoulders". A prime example of this tactic is infocenter's explaination of why editing is now optional. Infocenter stressed that the option is intended for those would-be PA authors do not want some publisher to edit their precious words, brilliant tone, and unique style. Optional editing is attractive to writers who believe that what they have written is the best thing since the invention of water and have been continuously insulted by the ever-growing pile of rejections sent to them by the agents and editors who didn't agree. They already believe that the publishing world is insidiously evil and misguided. After all, anyone who would deem to criticize or question their magnificant prose must be a horrible fool whose goal is to keep fresh, original voices out of the literary scene.
Of course, this is not "new" news to any of us who have been faithfully following the PA sage. Larry Cloppers has articulated that this is the type of consumer (aka: author) PA wants to attract - the bitter, egotistical, vanity writer. Because they cannot attract enough of these types of writers, they attempt to create them by spewing forth nauseating, David v. Goliath -like propaganda. PA steps in to help puny, powerless writers sidestep the behemoth of the NYC publishing houses.
Any writer who doesn't fit this mold will have a heartbreaking experience with PA. The tragedy is that most writers don't fit the mold. Most writers want to improve their craft, want to put forth their best work, want to sell books, and want the public to read their work.
I know this has been said before countless of times. I just wanted to put it in the context of the new optional editing scheme.