to be clear on this one, I am suggesting that it also be stated that by participating in discussion spaces, you agree with the terms of the rules about discussion spaces.
Another Ostrom principle is to give people access to affect the rules that are applied to them (different than a dispute resolution about how the rules were applied).
It may be that RFC processes are enough here, and there would probably need to be some rules about how you would participate in those processes as well.
I don’t know everything about the current moderation practice, but I think the “diff” I can see so far is:
Clearer rules about participation
Clearer agreement from participants with the rules
Dispute resolution process
A process to propose evolution to the rules, that itself has clear rules
A set of rules about being demanding of people’s time wrt to how you participate in any of the above discussed (I should be discussing things where rules say I discuss, I should not be demanding immediate resolution of disputes. My dispute or RFC about rules should not be limited to a “he did it too!”, but also needs to have some constructive outcome mapped to it that helps the community avoid such a conflict in the future. Participants must agree to be co-owners in conflict resolution, such that they are actively trying to resolve conflicts, and not start or perpetuate them. Otherwise the common resources will be destroyed.