If I ran Wordforge, my first action would be to announce that the longest I would stay would be two years. History has shown that after a couple years WF needs a change. (Although I leave the Teddy Roosevelt option open. I'd come back after a break, IF people wanted me back.)
And If I ran Wordforge, I would have nothing to do with the day-to-day forum stuff. My purpose would be strictly outward-facing--making sure we weren't breaking any laws, and maintaining good relations with other board moderators like Miss Manners and :dry: T'Bonz. My only inward-facing roles would be in any board-wide rules like "no private information" and the technical feasibility of meeting poster requests.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. If I ran Wordforge, my first action would be to dust off Cass' mission statement (again, as much as she annoys me, she's a smart girl and I'm pretty sure she did one). I'd open a discussion on it and entertain proposed changes. At the end of say, a week or two, the whole board would have the opportunity to vote to ratify the mission. Then I'd do something similar with the bylaws/constitution. (Oh, and I'd retain a non-voting purely advisory capacity for the next leader--my option.)
If I ran Wordforge I would have three types of staff: Moderators, Technical Admins, and (for lack of a better word) Judges. Technical admins would be essentially as they are today. They would be appointed by me (maybe approved by a majority of Mods, but I doubt it) and would exist solely to make things work and figure out how to do the cool things.
As much as Nick can piss me off from time to time, I gotta say, he seems to be a shit-hot admin, and I'd like to keep him around. (I'd keep the current staff around long enough for the transition, more on that later.) I'm thinking a primary and secondary tech admin. The secondary could (SHOULD) do work when the primary is around, but only as directed by the primary. Then you'd have a unity of command but both admins would maintain proficiency.
For Moderators, I'd get rid of all the current moderators and elect them from the board (SIDEBAR: I'd continue to allow duals, but I'd hunt them aggressively, and when identified, I'd have them set up with restricted permissions, so they couldn't vote or rep.) I'm not sure how many Mods we'd have, I'd rely on input from the staff and the board while working up the constitution (SIDEBAR II: I'd bring back the Embassy as a place for n00bs to post, pending approval and a general get-to-know-you place. And the Mission and Constitution would be stickied in the Embassy for everyone to read.) My thought is to be a Mod, you'd have to have been a poster for a year with--I dunno--a thousand(?) posts. Then someone would have to nominate you. And someone would have to second the nomination. Then if you accepted the nomination, you'd be added to the ballot. After a set period of time, we'd have a poll for an election, with the top nominees as moderators. (There might have to be controls for removing mods but that is too in-the-weeds for this discussion.) Then Mods would serve at the leisure of the Posters. My inclination would be for set term limits, although I'd entertain unlimited terms and a recall (maybe with a 2/3 vote or something) as a way of changing mods.
Finally, there'd be the Judges. I'd break the Help Desk into two subforums. One would be technical and would be run by me and my Tech Admins. The other would be the Court. Moderators could make rulings in their forums (Oh, by the way, Moderators would set the rules for their forums (I think)), and if they were out and another Mod had to make a ruling in their absence, the Primary could overturn the ruling. But if a poster had a problem with a ruling, they could take it to the Court. In court they'd present their side of things and the Mod would present his/her side. And anyone who needed to testify could. Then the Judge would review the Constitution and board common law, and either uphold or overturn a ruling. If either side had a problem, they could escalate the issue. I'd have three judges. They'd be elected like the Moderators. If there was an appeal, the other two judges could either hear the case or overrule. For the appeal, no new information would be entertained and the ruling would be upheld or overruled. I might allow myself the option of pardoning posters, but I don't know. Oh, and the Judges would also need to keep a record of rulings to build on the common law.
Granted, all of this has a lot of overhead. But remember where I said I wouldn't be involved in the day-to-day moderation? I'm thinking that would leave me the time to make sure the trains continued to run on time, as it were.