Giving my POV on mod notes with that sub-text involved, I normally use it for two main reasons.
First, if I’m giving out something of a mod-nudge, most often if the thread is heading into an extended period of off topic joking or a hijack. Mostly to distinguish between a real “guidance” situation, and where I may name one or more posters that are most caught up - because I want it to be clear that they hadn’t done anything precisely wrong, but that it was, again, guidance, nothing against them specifically.
Second, I use it when posters who are normally great have a one-off moment of excess anger on a subject, a specific poster, or something else that’s very abnormal for them. At which point I’m trying to make it clear it’s that specific post that’s a problem, not a general concern.
@What_Exit is correct, that removing the second clause is for the best, because it’s not 100% accurate, but for me, myself, and I…
I only look at historical mod notes if there’s a flag with a poster and my mind says “Didn’t I/We just tell them to stop this last week/month/etc.?” And I go back and see that A) yup, they’ve been given 3+ notes on the issue, and now we need to have a talk or B) I’m conflating the actions by a different poster, and should go ahead and give the benefit of the doubt.
So again, in general, I don’t consider a one off mod note to be an issue. When you have multiple mod-notes on the same/similar issues, especially if you’re already pulled an official warning for the same, then, yes, it’s part of the pattern.
That’s how mod notes inform my judgement, hope that helps @Roderick_Femm.