So I lost this response somewhere between the doctor's office and here. Let me see if I can replicate it:
There have been, and still are a lot of very popular games with toxic staffers, some of them in spite of it but others because of it.
Staffing is work, it's unforgiving and takes dedication and it takes passion. And you know what a lot of toxic people have? Passion. And you know what a lot of passionate players do? Become passionate staffers. Some of them are not self-aware, but a lot of people are aware just how big of jerks they are and wear it like a badge of pride because they get things done, because enough people feed their egos that they feel justified.
I'm not saying that any of this is okay, but PHBs (Psycho Hose-Beasts) have been running successful games, Muds and Mushes and Superhero and WoD and Pern and you name it, for decades. And as more reasonable, balanced people tend to leave the hobby, we pretty much expect this. A lot of people justify it to themselves, to each other, for decades.
I have no answer to this. I've been on these forums long enough to see the cycles and to want to get out of some of them. Is this view blunt honesty or toxic behavior? Different people will tell you different things about me, and that's a huge problem with the idea that is the core conflict with how this discussion has formed itself; few people can agree on what is a bad staffer, but damn are we ready to tell others what they should think one is!
I'm being part of the problem by participating in the same "no, I'm right", but while we're all in the chaos of the creative commons of open discussion, I wanted to get in my two cents.