Dave Hinz says...

The .moderated group was brought up by a non-participant of the
rec.woodworking newsgroup for unknown reasons. As such, discussing
that person's non-participation in the group is relevant to the
discussion.

Actually, the proposed moderator's non-participation in the group is
relevant to the discussion, but the proponent's non-participation
is irrelevant. Iit shouldn't matter who makes the proposal; the
proposal stands or falls on it's own merits. The moderator, on the
other hand, will have total control over the group, and thus discussing
his character, abilities, and commitment is very much on-topic.

Please keep your discussion related to the proposal when you crosspost
to news.groups and please don't crosspost to news.groups when you are
enaging in generalized flaming.

If you have a comment about anything else, please post it to
rec.woodworking only without crossposting it to news.groups.

We have a job to do, and do not need the additional noise from
you crossposting your flamewars here.

Do you have a FAQ which talks about the foolishness of creating a
moderated group when the person suggesting same is unlikely to be
a positive influence in the process?

No, because it doesn't matter who suggests the name.

That'd be helpful. Serious question - I've seen many groups where
a .moderated is created by someone with an agenda, and the .moderated
group languishes and dies because of non-participation.

In those cases, the correct thing to do is to attack the proposal, not
the proponent.