There are 4 mods, and yes, we barely need one. However, I agree with Madness. Put some action behind those words.
Second, the top 30 posters dont even make it to 75 posts. Sure PP can be irritating, but as you can see per the thread, his/her comment was ignored and it didnt turn into the shit show that you are afraid of. I'm not saying removing it was wrong, just that it didnt seem like a big deal. I think, though, that you are probably correct in this instance.
As for MG, hey buddy, at least he's around to keep the bored alive, which is more than can be said for almost anyone else. If it wasn't for him, there would be approximately 20 posts since last January. Heavy handed moderating on non-threatening posts is unacceptable, at least until there is enough traffic to even pretend like this forum isn't dead. As it is, having posts in the front page of every thread that have had no activity in months, or in some cases even years, is far more unattractive than a bit of fun.
Aside, thanks for stepping up Cüréthañ. You will find that it takes less time than you could possibly imagine to moderate a forum with less than a dozen actively posting members.
edit:
To further explain; I'm always fairly hesitant to remove posts of any kind as I feel like I'm too close. There isn't a large enough, or at least vocal enough, community here to create a feedback loop of any kind. I think "the mods" generally expect suspect posts to be reported, but this rarely happens, so then we're forced to assume that either nobody cares, or the at-large community finds it acceptable. This is admittedly not the most efficient way of moderating.
Another thing I'd like to note, is that I'm not convinced there are any potential-posteres, casual or otherwise. At least, in the several years this forum has existed in one form or another, I've not really seen any, and I find it hard to believe that more moderation would lead to more posting. However, I'd love to be wrong, so maybe you can help us out and find a better median between none and too much.