Another thing about the bias of the committee: only a kind of shared zeal can explain the sort of massive inaccuracies found in the report.  That is the heart of Jeff’s 30 reasons.  If you don’t care about procedural matters skip them.  You still can’t vote for a report that says untrue things about the Westminster Standards and untrue things about the people they are critiquing, in some cases a fact that is readily evident from the committee’s own citations.

If procedural justice is not worth considering, then lets move on to the substantial inaccuracy which, I would argue, was probably due in large part to the problems in procedure.