No such thing as ''the administrator'' here.

Well, I wouldn't stretch that too far; we do have 'an administrator', it's just not a single person. We have the gods, and the janitors and power users to whom aisle clean-up and troll squelching have been delegated (respectively); but in general, each member of these groups is free to act alone -- even ham-handedly. You're right about checks and balances, though, because any cabalist (including gods!) can find himself defrocked if he's deemed to have abused his power.

In your lifetime you couldn't program a better tension management framework involving agents, methods, charts, roles, delegation and whatnot but what already is established.

It almost sounds like you're saying our system is perfect. Do you simply mean a better system couldn't be programmed?

I rarely sensed that these were carried out to boost ones ego

Not nearly rarely enough, imho. "Our chief weapon is hubris! Hubris, and impatience. Our two weapons are..."

Game framework - really?

No such thing as victory conditions, for victory on one side means defeat on the other.

PerlMonks is already gamified. The XP system we have now is a stereotypical example of gamification.

I don't think having "victory conditions" in a gamified system requires that victory (and defeat) occur as they do in an actual game because, among other things, there is no end. It really just sets the definition of what the users are striving for (e.g. high XP). As the doco says: XP is just game. And it is.

PerlMonks is the minigame

That may be true, in a broader, more abstract sense... much as we might say life is just a game. But that's different from how the site experience has been gamified using XP.