There may be some truth in some of this but the practical difficulty here - that you do not address - is when our anonymous fellow posters insist on their right to also express their persoanal view as well as claiming to be acting as Max's proxy.

How are their fellow posters to know when one of these anonymous fellow posters are speaking for Max - and with his authority - and when they are expressing their own view. A personal view that may well be totally different to Max's and being made in posts which can be retrieved at any time.

I think the answer to that is it is Max's problem (if indeed it is a problem - I don't believe the volunteers here are unreasonable).

I'd think the odds are high that not every single comment made in brown text (etc.) reflects exactly how Max himself might have done something (and Max might have been more or less polite for all I know). To suggest it would be, to me would be like thinking a shop assistant may have dealt in every case with customers exactly as the owner of the shop would. It's not (to me) really likely.

I believe what you look at is an overall satisfaction and I would assume for example that as Joe Offer has an edit button that there is general satisfacion in his carrying out of duties from Max.

The only other way I could read it would involve Max for one reason or other keeping people (he can grant or deny the edit powers) to upset him (or his wishes for the forum). That anyone might do that does not make a lot of sense to me.