As for "qualification", my only "qualification" is believing that they're doing this because they think it benefits the forum and doing it as lightly as possible.

In my view the qualification required for any 'moderator' is for all of their imposed censorship judgement to be seen to be undertaken as a last resort and never show any cause for suspicion of it being selective and personally motivated.

Where there was any doubt - the moderator should fall back to just being an ordinary poster.

For example - Graham - you have avoided comment so far but would you judge the closure of the Affected by the Licensing Act 2003 thread - to be an action without any question of personal bias? And even if you would - would you be surprised if other posters did not?

Would you expect any poster to feel that any form of imposed censorship of their contribution was without this personal bias - when the moderator concerned was themselves setting the example of posting abusive personal attacks and calling this poster offensive names?