<p><strong>Absolutely.</strong>  How else can the moderators improve?</p>

<p>This question should remind us that criticism of <em>ideas</em> and <em>actions</em> is an essential part of our site, but criticism of <em>people</em> is not. It is important to keep the two separated. Everyone in our community is dedicated, knowledgeable, and well-meaning--I firmly believe that as an article of faith, which I find daily confirmed in all the posts on this site--but sometimes we disagree about things and sometimes our actions have unintended consequences. Let's take care not to offend each other in our efforts to resolve differences and make the site better.</p>

<p>This may also be a good place to clarify some assumptions in the question:</p>

<ul>
<li><p><em>All</em> community members of sufficiently high reputation, not just moderators, have authority to edit answers, close questions, and even delete answers.</p></li>
<li><p>Community members (again depending on reputation) can vote to <em>undo</em> the preceding actions.</p></li>
<li><p>Moderators acquire their authority by means of <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/election/1">community elections</a>; it is not something that is just arbitrarily given.</p></li>
<li><p>Discussion about how we all interact with the site belongs here on the meta pages. Discussion <em>per se</em> within the replies and even the comments on the main pages is pretty strongly discouraged by SE policy, <em>except</em> when it aims to clarify a particular question.  (This is a policy honored more in the breach than in practice, I admit, but it's still an ideal to aim at.)</p></li>
</ul>
