Legit question: why??
I thought the role of a moderator was to step in when there's a specific, obvious problem, or when their attention is called to something. Not to babysit the forum looking for trouble (or in many cases, potential trouble) they can stamp out.
Of course that would take more manpower, but IMO it's hardly necessary. =/ This is just a webcomic forum, representing a very tiny slice of a relatively small internet demographic. We don't need 24/7 surveillance.
I do remember the past where things were less strict...trolls usually just got flagged and banned. There were rarely more than 2 or 3 big discussions a week, let alone arguments, and when there were arguments, we usually just let them run their course. The number of people involved would dwindle down until only the most stubborn were left, or until the issue itself just fizzled out; whichever came first.
It wasn't the most peaceful system, but it worked fine, and it didn't feel like a 'cesspool' to me (if you don't want to see drama, you can always just mute the threads...). I can understand why maybe some might want to improve on that environment, but I really can't see how it was so untenable that there was no other option...
...Anyway, this has kind of turned into its own 'discourse', hasn't it? A long thread of internet arguments about whether or not internet arguments are useful. ^^; I'm surprised it's still open...