This is why our committee based moderation approach works best. Based on your example, a single Star Wars fan moderator won't be able to independently and autarchicly ban for a user for a non-rule violation such as merely expressing an opinion antithetical top the moderator themselves.
1). No, but all the mods sure can. 2). Also, if a mod can't separate from their personal biases then they shouldn't be a mod. 3). You wouldn't need to form a committee if the mods could be trusted to do their job competently.
1). Only if all mods had the same opinion. Which we don't. We are intentionally selected to address representation of the community - mostly factored upon video games and then followed by sub-communities within the forum.
2). Of which they usually do. If mods handed out bans in sole discrimination against members in contrast to their own allegiances, we wouldn't have any members save for mods within a month. But again, that's irrelevant. For major decisions, it's a committee. And that ignoring the fact that they do set aside their bias for duty. It's part of why we get selected in the first place. Because we've shown a historical record of professionalism, honesty and integrity against our own cognitive biases in the pursuit of truth and honesty.
3). We use a committee method for multiple reasons. We have records of opinion. Records of action. It functions when our console biases are irrelevant (political, socioeconomical, etc...).
Now may we presume that these adequately address your concerns or no?
Last edited by SpokenTruth - on 20 May 2020