We don’t really have a moderation team right now, since A statement from members of the moderation team. One person stuck around to ‘hold the fort’ and it seems one other now joined them (or also remained, I’m not sure about the exact history), but it seems weird to attribute particular characteristics to “the moderator team” at this point.
I don’t think that particular case is “typical” at all, and I’m not sure it’s worth getting into it.
I’m afraid some of the long threads on this forum show us that this is not the case - or perhaps, that being ‘rational result-oriented’ is not necessarily a succesful approach to arrive at a harmonious community. I suspect part of the problem with “rational result-oriented” is that it sounds great until you try to apply it to a particular situation - and then it turns out all participants in the conflict consider themselves to be the “rational result-oriented” ones and you’ve achieved nothing. This reminds me of “no politics”: that also sounds great in theory, but when we had to decide whether or not to accept Anduril as a conference sponsor, some felt strongly that we shouldn’t deny them the chance to sponsor because that would be “polical”, while others felt strongly that we should deny them the chance to sponsor because accepting them would be “political”.
To be honest, it’s not clear to me what you think should change. You seem to say a moderation team is important, but that “the current team” (which tbh barely exists) is somehow not good? Can you be more specific in what you think should change?