>>>Okay, a passive moderator, who gets active when someone has a complaint. A moderator who stimulates social behavior and suppresses anti-social behavior. Why not?!
>>
>>How would this moderator suppress anti-social behavior? Or stimulate social behavior for that matter?
>
>For one (and this may be the most difficult skill), notice dirty tactics in debates and send a warning when noticed. An example of a dirty trick is calling someone a whiner. This is an argumentum ad hominem. Even if it's your personal feeling about the other, it is not appropriate behavior to use it in the debate. Another one is the usage of dysphemistic wordings, e.g. calling someones argumentation 'utter nonsense'. It shows disrespect for the opponent.
>
>I'm not referring to all types of fallacies here. There are many fallacies that are made simply because there's still a certain lack of skills in debating techniques. Rather I'm referring to dirty tactics.
>
>Showing such disrespect for the opponent in the debate causes stress in the community. It is therefore an anti-social act.

Okay, your short answer is "send a warning". A warning implies that there is danger ahead. That danger would be?