A few observations:
The secret moderator program lends itself to suspicion. Allowing posters to have anonymous power over other posters invites temptation to abuse that power, probably, at least initially, with the best of intentions.
Power requires checks and balances in broad daylight. That's impossible so long as moderators are secret, or secretly on duty.
There is no accountability where there is anonymity of power.
Accountability also suffers when a favored few may use the subterfuge of multiple screennames, or are otherwise given wider latitude to violate posting guidelines, so long as they periodically pronounce the correct political shibboleths. Often, the weeding of dissent has occurred disingenuously, when one side was continually allowed to drop their gloves, while the other is banned for not knowing that standards won't be equally enforced should they mount a self-defense.
While this website is personal property, it's name and stated goals indicate a desire to promote a free republic.
How is that goal advanced by adopting habits inimical to a free republic?
