Well, you can have disagreement with moderation policy - and then take that disagreement directly to CGI or Ryuu. They are MORE than agreeable to hearing criticism when it comes to this area, and (so far as I've seen) are open to modifying policy if appropriate. Saying you think the moderation sucks and that's why the site is going to die, isn't really helpful. And while I know there have been problems in the past, those types of problems always seem to come and go - yet this site continues on.
Point is - try to be a solution to the problem, rather than just a problem.
I'll be totally honest - I mentioned to CGI just the other day, having a forum with zero "bad guys" is actually not a good thing. Sure, it seems like everyone is playing nice and all, but things will definitely get stale. The truth is (and I'm willing to bet it applies to a large majority of people here), the biggest douchebags are usually the ones that cause you to sign-up in the first place, so you can join the conversation and call that person out. To this day, I still remember the exact reason I joined - it was because of a user named @Monty (I'm sure some of the older people here like @kirby007 or @RolStoppable remember that ass clown) - but he was exactly the type of user who would currently not exist on these boards for more than 24hrs today, and that's actually a bad thing. Because without forum foils, things tend to get boring, quickly... ...NONE of this is to imply we need jackassery around here and temporary bans should always remain available. But perhaps perma-bans need to be focused exclusively on spammers and those posting extremely offensive stuff.
Anyway - this is delving FAR DEEPER than I want to get involved. Just know that CGI and Ryuu are always paying attention to this kind of stuff, and I have no doubt that if you would raise your concerns (in an intelligent, non-combative and non-insulting way), your concerns would be heard and addressed.
Bad guys certainly add some spice to forums and can be the reason why someone signs up to join the conversation, but on the flipside bad guys can easily drive off existing users from the site when moderation is perceived to be stacked in favor of the bad guys. The literal enforcement of the forum rules is a problem.
Bad guys tend to test the boundaries in order to do their thing while going unpunished. Since reports cease to work under such circumstances, there comes the point where users call out bad guys themselves and call them what they are. Then the literal enforcement of the rules comes into play and trigger words like 'troll' lead to moderation of the person who calls out while the person who gets called out remains untouched. From the mod team's perspective, this might seem like the correct way to go because the rules are enforced as they are written. But from the users' perspective, it's a place where bad guys enjoy benefits while an objectively true post can get you moderated. Then it's usually the same few people ruining various threads because the mods consider it within the rules while the community knows that calling the behavior out can result in a penalty, so good guys begin to use alternatives and eventually migrate to places like NeoGAF, ResetEra or Discord where the same problem doesn't exist for different reasons.
There's got to be a change in moderation, so when bad guys don't get moderated, the rest of the community should at least have the right to call bad guys out. That would even the playing field. But as it is now, a bad guy enjoys the same protection as a good guy when being called something despite there being a difference between being called something for good reason and being called something for no good reason. I doubt that anyone considers it a consolation when their ban note reads that the mod team agrees with them, but rules are rules. That just makes the whole situation more perplexing. The mod team knows that something is wrong, but does it anyway.
Concerns getting addressed by the mod team is unfortunately not something that holds 100% true. In this thread here we had a short stretch where mZuzek talked about fear of the mod team and cited an example where multiple users contacted him in private to warn him that he could get moderated for something that had no business getting moderated. CGI's response to that was to snip that portion from mZuzek's post, basically an attempt to sweep it all under the rug. The point wasn't pressed further because... well, fear of the mod team. If they decide a topic shouldn't be talked about, you better stay silent. That makes it difficult to improve things for the community, because what is conveyed is that you aren't supposed to talk about where something went wrong, why it went wrong and how the situation could have been handled and resolved better.
The quality of moderation is the one point in this thread that almost exclusively concerns longtime users (1+ years of activity). Losing people that way means fewer posts and fewer threads which in turn can lead to disinterest in the site from other users which reduces the daily amount of total posts further. This is a point that first and foremost concerns user retention rates. More specific criticism regarding moderation can be directed to a different thread you mentioned in a later post, but as a general point it's on topic here.
Getting new users to sign up in order to replace those who left is a matter of the functional side of the website. How does the site perform on mobile devices, are the ads intrusive etc. The ads are something that the admins of this site aren't in control of, so it's essentially mandatory to either sign up for the Supporter program or use an adblock. Sales estimates for 2019 need a place where weekly and cumulative sales can be looked up. As it is right now, people can get the impression that VGC has stopped all tracking because the pages for yearly sales end at 2018.
I think that summed all of the big points that were raised in this thread.