Personally I find myself believing UTL4 is just ultimately better designed. I’d love to hear from the team whether UTL3 was specifically envisaged as a bridge between UTL2 and UTL4 because - and I sincerely mean no disrespect - it feels a bit like a compromise-by-design or perhaps designed-by-committee in ways that designated half-way houses often can.
As something that gates what I generally think of as being ‘soft’ moderation tools, I can absolutely appreciate the desire to avoid gamification there - you don’t want people “earning” those and then potentially running amok. But, on the other hand - I found myself really swayed by @joebuhlig’s point regarding people becoming invested in Lounge topics. I also really found @Ed_S’s point on “demoting” valued community members compelling.
So I can understand the role that UTL2 is trying to fill, and the niche that UTL4 is trying to serve. But UTL3 feels awkward by comparison - as if there was a perceived overly large gulf between UTL2 and UTL4 and so something was slotted in accordingly. Some of the elements of UTL4’s moderation capacity, but specifically a small number of ‘safe’ ones. Maintaining UTL2’s automated nature to avoid overly burdening staff members with promote-me-above-UTL2 requests.
I find myself a bit wary of UTL3, truth be told. I’d personally prefer to make a conscious decision when it comes to granting any access to moderation tools whatsoever, meanwhile I’m not sure valued cornerstones of the community returning from a holiday, a death in the family, or a hospital visit to hear they were demoted in their absence is really the Discourse forum package at its best.