to add to this, youtube has the ability to be watched with the NSFW UI patch on lemmyNSFW (one of the added expand features [shows on the site as a book] before the update to 18.1)
there was no evidence only allegations (as in the post only had text explaining what the admins were doing before they left chat, no images) in the initial post, the person says they have evidence but does not want to present for whatever reason from above, and as for deleting the only way i have verified that escapes the modlog is the user deleting the post (since i have not been able to get solid info on if a post purge reports to the modlog yet) and the admins say both parties were in bad form for the actions they took with padded posting the allegations and them acting the way they did toward the post with the ridiculous ban. this is all we have as of right now.
and realize that as someone that does not know the admins at all, i dont trust them either but beyond trying to look out for the health of the server and perhaps going a bit harsh on immidate rules they havent been overly adversarial to the community. thus i feel that till there is evidence or actions that say otherwise i dont think we should condemn them to being guilty on hearsay.
about the only thing we could condemn someone for is the unprofessionalism of an admin and the method in witch someone was banned.
tl;dr: at this point it is hearsay till somone makes a move, so it might be best to wait and see what comes out in the wash. the only thing someone did that was factually wrong was ban someone unprofessionally. also, do post purging from admin get recorded in the modlog?
or someone decided to stab them in the back after appearing cordial to working together and eventually leaving on what seemed like good terms.
we do not have enough evidence to condemn ether party ether the admins need to act (e.g. ) or the person or admins need to come forth with evidence. so maybe keep the torches unlit for a bit longer.
in short, we have no solid evidence that they actually got called out, or back stabbed. lets see what the next move is first
i kinda figured it would require some sort of verification process so we are not banning people for little reason (a record system of bans from communities on the system, via a ticket or rep sheet) and maybe a script to ban if banned from x number of comms, or after it has been reviewed by an admin. though right this minute might be unrealistic implementing this in the near future
https://join-lemmy.org/docs/users/04-moderation.html
from the documentation there is a way to ban a user from the site, but only admins have access to it, might be worth trying to coordinate with them to ban them
defederation could still be used as a gauge and tool to tell what the greater consensus of the instance of the federated community is, such as potential legal problems, or going there might have other issues. so an instance that is defederated will appear to the greater community as untrustworthy especially when mass-defederated.
on your second point, while u/paddedperson posted their allegations, i am unfamilliar with lemmy to tell if a post not showing in the modlog as deleted by an admin or mod means it was removed by the user. and i am willing to let the admins respond with an action (e.g. releasing new rules) or a release of the logs before condemning them to paddedpersons allogations, no need to witch hunt on this little concrete info
as for this last point, i did not mean rules as additional rules but more post these new rules that are in development before making a decision on this entire thing
this is the way, even things like linux distros do this, fascinating to watch though