[quote=@Lugubrious]
Looks like I've messed up pretty badly then.  It's not been many times in my life that I've felt my heart sink.  Doing badly on tests gets me pretty badly, but I think that knowing that I've screwed up so badly that now people who I care about hate me and that there's nothing I can do to fix it is just about the worst feeling I can have.  For a while I was holding out the hope that others were in the wrong, but it looks like it's me.  It makes me want to either give up or break down, completely.  I'm sorry, for whatever it's worth.  Anything I could say in my defense would only make me shabbier.  It must seem like a complete lie if I say that I never meant to be an asshole, except for my recent post to Plank.  I say I'm stupid because I don't think about what I'm saying online, and what effect it has on people, which is why I tend do go back and edit my posts loads of times.  That much is true.

I don't know what to do next.  Would it fix things if I were to leave, or does suggesting that make me even more of an asshole?  I never thought I'd dig myself a grave this deep.  
[/quote]

Look man, I don't think anyone honestly wishes for you to leave. Nor do I think most people believe you are an absolutely terrible GM. I mean the game has survived this long. I think the real issue here often stems from your tendency to jump to 'extremes' for lack of a better term. That is to say you often seem to frame things in binaries and react to what you perceive as the 'popular' opinion. A good example was the recent discussion on deadlines where you flip-flopped between two extremes until the rest of us were able to point out there is no need for an exclusive-or approach to how things are handled regarding time skips and what not. This creates the perception of that knee-jerk reaction that Plank mentioned. 

When someone questions something you have a bad habit of jumping to neatest extreme you see. In this case that was the disbandment of a senior team. I get part of the appeal is you might view it as the cleanest approach, but to others it comes off as really left field and leaves them wishing they never brought up their complaint in the first place. This isn't healthy for a game and it's what has fostered some of the ill will others have. Not to mention your tone can often read as a passive-aggressive attack. 

But hey, I'm not here to enumerate your faults, just to explain the biggest issues I've seen and potentially offer some advice on how to help. 

So with regards to the extreme, left field decisions, I feel the first step is to start looking at this game as on more of spectrum than just two options. As a text based game there's always a slew of options available to you, but even if you can't always see them there's a relatively easy solution: Always ask the affected players before making any sort of major decision. And more importantly ask for their input. Don't just disband a team that you think isn't doing anything, bring up your concerns and get the players to help you reach a decision. Not only does it help you make decisions, it typically leads to better decisions everyone is satisfied with. Plus it helps stave off situations of favoritism because everyone gets an input not just the one with the concerns. 

Look, I've been playing these games for a scarily long amount of time when I really think about it, and many of the best GMs I've played under were people who would always let others into the loop for major decisions. Obviously I don't mean plot necessarily, in fact keeping twists secret is kind of important, but anything that would directly affect the players in a way they couldn't control should never come out of left field. The quickest way to make people, not just players, angry is when something happens which they can't find the reason behind. As long as you make sure to keep the line of communication open and always allow players to give direct input for things involving their characters. People respect a GM whose actions are fair and make sense. 

So like Plank and Krayzikk and Write all said, take this entire ordeal as an opportunity to grow as a person and a GM. Listen to your players and let them give input when you or someone else has concerns about their characters. Leaving won't solve anything, that's just stepping off the trail, what helps is simply find the right way forward. People really do care about this game, and finding a way to grow is the ideal outcome. 

And really man, don't be afraid to simply ask, before making any decision of any kind, "What do you guys think we should do?" or "How can I do better?"

It's collaborative writing space after all, no need to be judge, jury and executioner. 

Anyhow that's just my overly long 2 cents which has probably been rendered moot by some ninja'ed post I did not forsee.