I agree. This thread (and linked latam issue specifically) however seems to be mostly about allegations that they did not (and should have). Thus my intention of:
Conflicts of interest are not resolved by voting or in a popularity contest
was to suggest to the user who suspects that some moderator hides their affiliations and/or is not appropriately reacting (i.e. is using their powers even when they are in conflict of interest) what they should/could do themselves to effect a change (as simple “let’s sweep the problem under the rug and pretend the problem doesn’t exist” is likely to be unsatisfactory course of action for them).
Note that any of that should not to be taken as me taking any sides or accepting any allegations as valid – but instead that I (specifically as a moderator - and often in other cases) always try to put myself in shoes of each side in a conflict, and how they might view the world.
Absolutely agree. See this post and below for that suggestion specifically!
It is not a question of doubting anyone’s honesty.
Perhaps it is not for you and me. Some other users have made some allegations in that direction, though, AFAICT.
If I were acting as moderator, I would be the first to remove myself where my impartiality could be doubted.
So would I. Yet, it has been alleged that some acting as moderators did not. Which is what my post was about
what to do if you suspect C-o-I protocols have been breached. (as I do not intend to invest enough of my time to examine all claims being made, and, quite selfishly, since they do not really affect me, I prefer to stay neutral on the subject. Still, giving general hints how those affected might make their voices heard - was much quicker and easier, and thus, worth some of my time).