The "no cleanup" thing dates back to the early 80s! It arose from the following line of reasoning...

        Wizzes are supposed to be all-powerful. Nevertheless, sometimes wizzes make mistakes. However, to admit this would mean that mortals would perceive the wiz whose mistake was corrected as being in error. Therefore, if a wiz DID goof up, it's better for mortals to think that the wiz was rectifying the fault personally through an act of magnanimity than because it was a mistake.

        It works something like this: wiz A logs on and fods mortal B for (eg.) looby looing. Mortal B it then turns out wasn't looby looing, and complains to arch-wiz C. Arch-wiz C tells mortal B that wiz A can act howsoever he or she chooses and mortal B should go boil his or her head. Arch-wiz C also tells wiz A that mortal C has perhaps been badly done to and wiz A maybe ought to do something about it. Wiz A then tells mortal B that his or her time spent dead has been long enough for them to learn their lesson, and wiz A resurrects or arranges for the resurrection of mortal B. Alternatively, wiz A tells arch-wiz C to get lost, whereupon mortal B is still resurrected and wiz A becomes mortal A.

        This is still the preferred method of dealing with non-urgent cock-ups. Essentially, the wizzes are a conspiracy which attempts to avoid at all costs the revelation that any of them are actually fallible. It's not always possible to do this, but it should be attempted if, when wiz D encounters wiz A's mess, wiz D can answer the following question in the affirmative: "can wiz A fix this before something worse happens?". If so, wiz A SHOULD be obliged to fix it, but if not then wiz D can.

                Richard