There is anonymous moderation where members have never met you physically and there is moderation where you are known to hundreds of members because they have all met you at some time, usually at one of the regular association meets.
Being known make a difference and at times can incite jealousy and more. About 13 years ago I set up a forum for a sporting association and warned them from the onset that it will require moderation. They ignored this and it wasn't long before committee members were looking for a solution. So I recommended that members be delegated as moderators and created special account privileges for them. But then those members were being targeted for removing what was unfit to read on a site that not only coached juniors but was also begging for government sponsorship. Consequently we saw a lot of moderators assigned who resigned soon after and when no one was announced as being a moderator I was blamed for not only deleting posts, but also of controlling the sport statewide which was ridiculous because I given up on that forum long ago as its content was not conducive to the mindset needed for good programming.
Anonymous moderation is less painful and there hasn't been a forum that I still subscribe to that hasn't suspended or cautioned me for "being honest" at some time or other (including this one).
However, if you do have an opinion and want to join a discussion, it would be more ethical to not moderate in the topics that you enjoy.