Actually, Gerry, when it is an interpersonal issue, you try to handle it at the lowest possible level.  It's always best if the parties can take care of it themselves AND in private.  Of course, I am generalizing a bit, but you get the picture I'm sure.

I told my people, that if they had a problem with "me" or the way I wanted something done, they could always say so....... IN PRIVATE!  I even allowed them to vent a bit and be a little insubordinate....... IN PRIVATE!  There was a line that they would not have wanted to cross and, fortuntately, never did. 

"Discipline" is probably not the best word to use here because it has a very limited meaning.  But I haven't got a better descriptor to use, yet.  You definitely got the meaning of what I was trying to say.  With regards to the narrow definition of "disciplining," yes you are right..... it should be the MODS and they seem to do a very good job of that (see..... praising in public!).  However, I think it is fair for us to "come to the rescue" of anyone, including the mods, if we think they are taking unwarranted and PUBLIC heat...... know what I mean?   If the heat is in private, I wouldn't have a clue that the fire was even lit, much less burning the house down. 

I think a decent thing to do would be to make a new rule, amongst ourselves, that we don't pick on the MODS or make any negative commentary about them or their policies....... except in private comms with same.  Is that fair?  After all, would we like it if a moderator of a political discussion was being nailed by the participants vice what it is that the participants are supposed to be doing?  In the case of the MODS here, I see them as minimally necessary.  They are here to make sure that things don't get out of hand...... they aren't here to interfere with the discussion and, quite frankly, I haven't a clue if they participate in them or not.  That is probably a good thing!