I don't know...there are actually two schools of thought regarding moderator involvement in the process. (which it sounds like Zenrax was kinda alluding to)

In help and questions I can see how a thorough knowledge of the information would be required, but in general discussion and OTcrowd? I can see it going both ways...

If the person is well aware of what has gone on before, they could use their judgment concerning whether a post really is breaking the rules...on the other hand I can see this person giving leeway to those same people because they know them....It really depends on the moderator in question and if they can keep their perspective.

I don't see what post counts really have to do with how good a moderator is. Remember they might be the type of moderator who likes to stay in the background. The activity of the forums they are moderating would also be in question. If they are doing their jobs well, everyone knows the rules then they rarely have to step in and spank someone. So THAT might be a point of contention to discuss, but really if that is a problem, it sounds like it would be more appropriate for a PM to their boss.

I have no problems with a guideline being put in place making 18 the minimum age to moderate. There are exceptions to this and that is why I think it should be a guideline and not a rule. If someone 16 or 17 comes along and has no issues treating everyone with respect and consistently applying the forums rules then there is no problem...