[quote=Magic Magnum]
I wasn't asking why it's accepted by culture, I was simply highlighting there are ways to run an RP without a GM and it can still work well. It should also be noted RP's are not the same as say running a nation. There's far less people to deal with, and really only one main focus/goal in the end. To have a successful roleplay, as opposed to say covering all the necessities of living.While no set leader in a political system is suicide, it is something commonly proven to be a viable system in running an RP. I'm mainly just arguing the "One size fit's all" mentality approach that seems to be happening here in that all RP's need a GM, and all GM's must get themselves involved on player conflict.
[/quote]

... Because it [i]works[/i]. :lol If you have a group of individuals attempting to decide the fate of player X you are more likely to encounter problems than just having the GM do it.

Also most people who argue don't actually stop arguing long enough to really think about things and attempt to come to compromise.

Oh, and you brought up "common culture", so I expanded on it for you and noted why it's a natural glove fit to have a GM & players: It matches how the rest of society typically functions. Yes, you can do it without a GM, but why would you? That's incredible pointless. The GM's role is to play God and make the world and plot, to manage the excess details so that the players can focus purely on their own characters and on each other. I mean, yes, you could distribute that responsibility over the whole, but... [i]Why?[/i] It's not like having a GM stops the players from making suggestions and requests... And it provides a central authority figure from which direction and rule can be established...