For the majority of rulings/ruling requests, shouldn’t the sequence be - 1. question arises 2. official sought 3. ruling made? Once 1. question arises = players wait for ruling.
I think the problems arise when players in that game explain what the ruling will be and try to play on. Even when all the players know what the ruling will be, often times it is to everyone’s benefit to get an official ruling anyhow - in case the situation rises again. For example - minor malfunctions. Get a ruling so that if/when it happens again - the officials might weigh throwing out a game. Also - as a player within a group, I don’t have the authority to DQ someone from a game (even if that is the rule that will be enforced).
More experienced players that know the rules are not equal to TDs, but often understand how a ruling will go and might come across as having authority. The best thing that player can do is let the others know that a ruling is needed. Not make the ruling and play on.
On a final note - one of the biggest TDs in our area, @PAPA_Doug can correct me if I am wrong, basically insists that rulings happen at the same time as the issue that requires the ruling. Don’t come to him with a situation where the game is over and something happened on ball 2. I think it’s a very good policy. I have stolen this from him and require the same when I TD.