Supercilious? Only if you got a really bad word power booster for Christmas or don't understand what the thread was about. Or if you do but can't afford to.
For the odd newbie, Cub Reporters was actually created because I found myself to be one of the heaviest of hands on that particular, years ago, and only after it was pointed out to me indirectly by chrys, through a simple enough question. Since then I've made it a habit to keep my reports as infrequent as I can and the thread serves as a humorous reminder to everyone involved. I kept it up largely because it was popular and people would ask about it when I stopped.
I've noted myself, friends, and people like you in it. No one goes unnoticed who goes on notice.
Most of it is innocuous, and many of the reports warranted and helpful to staff. Most of the "winners" have been gracious enough and gotten the thrust of the thing.
Some don't appear to care how often they use it or over what. Take musterion's absurd report a while back alleging a racist post by me and sure to capture the Disingenuous Dingo award if chrys ever resurrects them. It's a silly, willfully obtuse stab at distortion that largely underscores a problem on the point of separating emotional baggage from objective observation.
Well, no. The point isn't to avoid using the function, but to be aware of it. Take this month. If I was still doing it I'd be in it, if at the "eating grass and mostly trotting after butterflies" end, at five reports. I use those sort of descriptions for marginal contributors. You'd be 3 lengths in front of me at 8 reports, more or less, and JR would be waaaaaay out in front of all comers at 33, with the nearest competition at 18 reports. That sort of thing.
