I mean, why not create your own subreddit then? All you have to do is create it with a small group of people to see it, post good articles, and keep a 24/7 watch to kill the comment and post spam going to viagra and obvious trash.

I'm not interested in unpaid labour, I barely have time to do the paid one.

So to be clear: you're fine with all the moderators leaving, but you don't want to moderate, but you also don't want there to be no moderation. You would like an arbitrarily "good" moderation you agree with completely, from someone else. Fantastic. Online community in a nutshell.

I just want reddit to moderate the moderators (there are very few that push an agenda), to me it doesn't seem an archaic idea.

It feels like there is a bit of contradiction inherent in your position here, no?

Why would it be?

Because any good ones get banned by reddit?

Is this an actual question?

I think the general reddit community underestimates how important moderation is. Yes, you have some moderators who go overboard, push a personal agenda on something that's supposed to be a neutral subreddit, etc. But subreddits without active moderation very quickly (in order of increasing tragedy) lose their focus, get overtaken by spam, or become hangouts for Nazis. reddit closes unmoderated subs for a reason.

Also a large chunk of the people who complain about moderators are actually upset that moderators stop their subreddits from being overtaken by Nazis. If you want completely unmoderated anonymous public discourse, go to 4Chan and see how it goes there. Though even that is moderated.

I don't want zero moderation, I just want good moderation, which is not the case when you have a few mods that push their agenda over many enormous subs.

I frequented /r/cfb and /r/collegebasketball, which are terrific and very on-topic. Very little drama there. I can easily imagine those going to the dumpster without their mod teams.