I generally agree. Technically, it seems that to allow a person to edit other people’s posts, you don’t need to be moderator, but a “Trust Level 4 - Leader” which (following the official blog) can only be reached by manual promotion. (You can gain “Trust Level 3 - Regular” automatically and this lets you edit post titles and categories). There is a difference between a “Leader” and a “Moderator”, most notably "Leader"s don’t see flags by other users.
Both ways, I think we would like to have “Leader” and/or “Moderator” users from the broader community. Preferably, there would be a transparent process to select those. Unfortunately, I don’t think this is a good time to design such a process - the attention of the community is already IMHO spread thin between the SGB elections and discussions about CoC and governance which are IMHO all higher priority.
I therefore think a responsible course of action would be to have a better discussion about this process later (maybe the new SGB can decide this or a full community consultation be started by them). In addition, we could get stuff moving faster by choosing a temporary “cool kids club” of Leaders - i.e. me, @jonah or other “prominent members” choose whoever they like, possibly by an open call here on Discourse (starting with @maxbiostat who I think would do great). The cool kids club would have a set expiry date (say January 31st, 2020). This would mean faster action but could also do some damage to the community and lessen the overall trust (I am calling this a “cool kids club” because that’s what it likely would appear to be to outsiders). I think the risk is relatively low, but I also think the possible gains are of limited importance. I am not sure if this is a good tradeoff and would welcome your thoughts on this.
And really thanks to @maxbiostat for bringing this up, I am glad you took the initiative on this!