I think Macho has hit the nail on the head in many respects, but I find his attitude toward declarations of the necessity for hierarchy too sympathetic--in particular, accusations such as those so flippantly leveled by Jay Varner and Mark Rehder. Their patronizing attitude of leftist theory vs. praxis is exactly the type of pompousness that breeds coercive hierarchy, the consequences of which stretch well beyond the walls of our bike shops.
Rehder declares simply "good luck" to those who have been working tirelessly, uncompromisingly, and quite effectively on projects that don't depend on the singular power of someone such as himself. The fact is, these projects do exist even if he would prefer not to acknowledge them. Like Macho says, "no hierarchy" is by no means the same as "no accountability" and "no structure".
This thread is hinting at something much deeper than the question of hierarchy. In the end I feel it is a division between those who see the goal of their project as "more bikes on the streets no matter what" and those who feel we are working toward something more, like creating institutions and community spaces that resemble the type of egalitarian society we are trying to build brick by brick. I have found that folks who advocate hierarchy in their shops are much more likely to be of the mind that bikes and bike shops are an end rather than a means to a much greater good. How else can hierarchy be justified by pointing to the filling of higher quotas of bikes and open shop hours?