At the time it was half an hour I was awake, so not particularly tired.
I don't understand where you read in my post that we shouldn't have the moderation.
I said that if we have to have this feature it must work for *any* kind of change, otherwise the way to workaround it can be found rather easily unless you put *a lot* of efforts in try to identify typos and/or legitimate changes to a post.
And: at that moment a mod would "demonstrate" how important is that feature to the other users.
So, please tell me where I said we shouldn't have post moderation.
That said, what the rational behind that feature?
The rational of the post moderation is usually fight spam.
The rational of this feature is...well, all I can think of is for forums that have a board that act as a market place or advertisement (like our showcase, I'm not saying sm.org wouldn't benefit from this feature), where people are allowed to post under moderation because the moderator shall review the posts before having them visible.
Now, I don't know how wide is the use of boards as market place/showcases, that's why I suggested a mod: 12000 downloads in a month would be a clear demonstration that this feature is highly needed, a single request from a single user that needs it well...Do you see my point?