You interpreted a halfway sarcastic reply to an argument you yourself assess as "a poor choice of words" as a personal insult and, as a reaction, doled out actual personal insults disguised with a monomolecular veil of condescending armchair psychology. Maybe re-assessing the original communicative situation would have been in order? Maybe not overreacting would have been an option?

If you're looking for actually abrasive community members, please do open your eyes and look around, it's not me. If you felt insulted by my last post, I apologize, because yes of course it isn't my habit to personally insult anyone over such not even mildly controversial stuff.

It was indeed 'absurdly funny' to think that community moderators paid by GOG would be "neutral", but that was my idea that I ridiculed, not yours. I may not have expected that you laugh with me, but I definitely didn't expect your reaction to be this negative. And if you're being honest, you're well aware that's not the reason for the downvotes I'm getting everywhere regardless of the content of my posts, and if you're being equally honest, you probably strongly dislike particularly the users that routinely downvote my posts.

We've just been over yet another 40+ page thread in which people really, really wanted to feel personally insulted over nothing, and they continued to feel personally insulted when people actually engaged with the bland parrotting of falsehoods that they erroneously thought of and still think of as "arguments". If I have been abrasive in there, and you've gotten the impression of me there, I am sorry, but I will be as rhetorically clobbering, deeply sarcastic and condescending again should another pile of this neanderthal hogwash surface.

Now on to treat your clarified arguments with the respect they would have deserved if clad in just slightly different words.

I'd object to "objective", but for the sake of the argument, yes: If not organized among many peers, if alone, and left more or less alone in this endeavour, the first volunteer community moderator would be his or her own judge, jury and executioner. They would follow GOG's ideas of community moderation less and make up their own mo[d]rality more than a paid employee of the company.

Which would of course be an even stronger argument for what we both would deem inappropriate anyway – plainly, it would not even be to GOG's benefit to assign voluntary community moderators. But I guess they're VERY well aware. There's a reason they never even tried.