Judges of Other People's Morals

It starts with something a group genuinely shouldn't ignore. Somebody's conduct is hurting people — money borrowed and not returned, newcomers pursued, a member using the room as a hunting ground. So the committee talks about it, and then the committee decides something about it, and now the committee rules on conduct. That is a small step and it never gets taken back. Bill tracked what came of it across the whole Fellowship, and his finding is unsparing about how well it worked (A.A. pamphlet P-17): committees "have sometimes composed minute rules and regulations and now and then have set themselves up as judges of other people's personal morals," and he knew of no case where it had any lasting effect — "except, perhaps, the election of a brand-new committee!" The group gets nothing except a fight and a new committee. What actually protects people isn't a committee with jurisdiction. It's members who will say the true thing out loud, to the person's face, without needing a title to do it.