>Too much work on the moderators
Go into any thread and observe how quickly off topic, low contributing, trolling appears. If there were a few moderator actions in every thread, every moderator action would take several clicks and actions. The moderator needs to decide what to do, send warnings if applicable, etc.
In contrast to this, the moderator can just scroll through a thread and just click 'approve' on his or her favorite on-topic and contributive content, like scrolling down an Instagram feed and clicking the like button. I submit that it would take much more effort to actively moderate every thread than to passively moderate and essentially have a 'like' system.
Actively moderating and punishing people seems like a lot more work and stress. The moderators are going to be reading the threads anyway, regardless of any system used. If we go with post approval I'm willing to help out with moderation in that sort of system. If the system were set up to where moderators see an 'approve' and 'disapprove' button next to posts that would be very easy to click on a button as one reads through the thread. That sounds easy and effort free to me.
Why can't the very heavily moderated Q&A as well as the poster-restricted Believers section be used to help answer questions about FE models and allow for FE believers to debate amongst each other to better hash out potential issues and/or obstacles in any given model in a space where there is no RE interference, respectively? I feel like this elephant in the room keeps getting overlooked, despite mentioning that it is, in fact, sitting in the room with us at this very moment and will certainly poop on the floor soon if we continue to ignore it.
How would this help with the low content, off topic, and trolling posts inherent in every debate thread?
We do have answers to things like the sinking ship effect. It's inconsistent, the effect changes frequently, we can often see further than should be possible, and curvature cannot be demonstrated. Yet the same people who know this will spam sinking ship photos again and again and again, rather than to address the arguments previously given on that subject and which are published with timelapse videos in places like one of the wikis, and with accounts of inconsistency stretching back to Rowbotham. These people have been here for years, and know about these arguments, as it is frequently discussed, and will go into a thread and pretend like they do not exist. These people will often post this content in threads not even about that subject. It's trolling and spamming and happens very frequently.
Under an approval system a moderator would be reading a thread about, say, Religion and FE. Someone spams some sinking photos. The moderator either just scrolls past it or clicks 'disapprove'. Easy, nearly effortless moderating.
I suspect that if such a system were actually implemented that posting behaviors would change quickly. Eventually the moderators could possibly give some trusted posters free roam, like you suggested. But perhaps that can be up to moderator discretion. I would suggest to propose to try to require approval for all debate posts, and then change the parameters as needed if unworkable, to find a balance for what works for the moderators. All of these problems
can be solved.