Hmmmmm. I'm curious about what Paul's intentions were. Simple vandalism/arsonist kicks? Protest of corporate products in the pavilion below? Forced de-emphasization of significance of Saturday's Burning of the Man event? (The last paragraph of the Chronicle article illustrates that factor:

"... A festival-goer who identified herself as simply Erica said she and her friends were "upset by the fact that someone would take this away from everybody who comes to the event just to see the man burn. To try to sabotage him is completely wrong. We wait all year long. This is an adult's Christmas party."

Another factor is the "come early/arrive late factor". Most burn vets agree that the full BM experience requires a week's stay; arrive monday or tues, ease into it, feel the energy build etc. With the increased popularity in BM's mass appeal, I would guess there is an increase in "short-timers" trying to cram the experience into a slightly lengthened holiday; arrivals on thurs, friday, or (gulp!) saturday. Thus, there would be a situation of "Ooops, ya missed it! Ha ha!" That actually is pretty funny...they should have let the motherfucker burn...but it doesn't surprise me that they didn't. Chaos and anarchy are on their way to extinction at Burning Man.