(By "stories" I don't mean to include job posts. They are a different type of object, though they get displayed similarly.)
Moderators' votes are not weighted differently than anyone else's. I don't weight votes at all. I've occasionally considered it, and I might try it in the future, but if I did I wouldn't do it based on whether someone was a moderator.
Why not? The people you trust to moderate on HN are really the some of
very best candidates for being trusted with a greater weighting on their
votes/flags. Some might claim it's elitist or unfair, but it is
entirely practical and pragmatic.
Additionally, just about any algorithmic way to assign greater trust,
and hence, additional weight in voting/flagging, will most likely result
in a higher percentage of moderators being trusted than the normal
populace. If your algorithm did not result in a higher percentage of
moderators being given greater trust/weight, then I'd be worried. ;)
The tough thing about an algorithmic approach is whether or not a person
with highly up-voted comments and submissions has good habits,
intentions, and judgement when it comes to their voting and flagging?
Pure "common sense" (cognitive bias) speculation suggests the two
"should" be correlated, but you're the only one with the data needed
to prove it.
If there is a way to algorithmically define your standby phrase, "He
means well," then I don't know how to do it. If you do figure it out,
please write about it. It would make the world a better place.
(By "stories" I don't mean to include job posts. They are a different type of object, though they get displayed similarly.)
Moderators' votes are not weighted differently than anyone else's. I don't weight votes at all. I've occasionally considered it, and I might try it in the future, but if I did I wouldn't do it based on whether someone was a moderator.