Since I've already held forth on this topic in other threads, I'll try to limit myself a bit this time. Plus, as someone mentioned, this particular equine has now been beaten so thoroughly it could probably now go into IKEA meatballs.

While individual circumstances can be debated, and I'm not saying that Caro's errors were equivalent to Patrick's, I do agree with the OP on principle:

1) there ought to be a conceptual recognition that it is impossible to have a clear fall that does not impact the aesthetic qualities of the program, and therefore it should be reflected in the PCS in some fashion.

2) it can also be recognized, however, that every succeeding fall/disruption has greater impact, and the penalties might increase in non-linear fashionm, starting with a fairly moderate level for the first. That way, the first one doesn't necessarily mean you're out of the running, but the impact is recognized, and you've gotten your first yellow card on the increasing scale of penalties.

Further distinctions can be made on the basis of how the skater copes subsequent to the fall/disruption. Thus, skaters that do their best to get back on track as quickly and completely as possible wll minimize the negative impact, while those who do not will suffer further in their scores. Nevertheless, the fact that there is a base penalty (see above) recognizes the conceptual truth that there is no such thing as a fall that does not disrupt the program.

3) this system ought to have well-defined paramaters, to minimize the arbitrariness of judgment (just look at the arguments here on this forum).

I will use Caro's program-ending fall in the LP to illustrate some thoughts. Now, I recognize that this is a strong and quality program. That is not the issue. But as it applies to the thread topic, consider this: why, do you suppose, did Lori/Caro choose to put that jump where they did? As most of us should be able to see, it was not merely to gain a second-half jump bonus. In my view, it's clear that the jump placement was deliberately designed to create an emphatic, thrilling emotional punctuation, to bring the house down, as it were. In short, they were planning for a PCS boost from this technical element. If Caro had hit that jump, I do not doubt that it would have had the desired effect.

But having recognized this, what should, logically, be the effect of a fall on that aesthetically critical jump? Yes, I would argue that it should negatively impact PCS, just as its clean execution would have positively affected it. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.

Again, do I believe this was on the same level or magnitude has Patrick's failings in the LP? Of course not. But let's be intellectually honest about it and agree that it is a difference of degree, not kind.