A very interesting post, "Ti". Thanks (I think...) for raising these issues.
Thankfully, we all have dayjobs. Variable, but we do. And, some of us have hobbies, too. We try to have sufficient overlap, but, well, sometimes we get drunk, and miss the event...
By the numbers...
1) We are an ad hoc committee that never "meets" and is as responsive as we can be. We pm A LOT, but cannot hope to keep pace with the growing popularity here. Does this moot our efforts? We hope not, and we pm constantly on how to be effectual, but not intrusive. A delicate balance. Regardless, we are surely not "trainable"...
2) Unreasonable. Posts are precipitated by the topic, or dialogue. It is, and must remain, dynamic.
3) ibid, #2.
4) This is not a popularity contest, nor a "Golden Globes". Such ratings have been proposed before and seem to inhibit contributions. We cannot know where pearls of experience or new ideas may gestate and come from, but to inhibit anything, is simply wrong. Although we don't require Members use their actual names, we have all seen there remains defensive reaction to argument and/or "judgement" here. That is one reason why "Giskard", amongst others, was so insistant upon establishing the DIY Forum. This is a critical attempt at parsing "opinion" from JBL Engineering (Technical Help), so that our readers can know when they are entering the realm of DIY. Ratings are moot - how can we handicap the suitability of the voters? Members need to decide themselves, based upon the dialogue, whether they endorse the concepts. Moderators strive to parse and attribute things to facilitate those decisions. Moderators are like judges: they do not make law, they only interpret it.