@SirLegendary is correct, these titles are used for informational purposes, not as an indication of status. I would also like to delve a little bit more into why these names would not necessarily have a positive impact on the community.
Instead of Administrators they can be referred as WIZARDS.
And instead of Moderators they can be referred as WARLOCKS.
Which would require people, many of whom believe that wizards and warlocks are the same thing, to consult the About page every time they forgot which ones were the administrators and which ones were the moderators. It's not easy to remember when there's no indication of hierarchy in the title, so you would see an increase of reports of broken features and similar complaints to moderators, which they would then have to forward to administrators all because some people were unclear as to what the difference between the two jobs were.
Also, the moderators could have reason to find their theoretical titles offensive, as "Warlock" does have a much more negative connotation than "Wizard".
Taken from this article,
Wizards are generally viewed as good people with strong moral codes who also offer wise advice and assistance, and many fantasy stories feature a kindly wizard who helps the characters achieve their goals. A warlock, on the other hand, is sometimes portrayed as a much darker individual.
In some cases, for example, a warlock may be viewed as a more advanced wizard who works on more complex magic, and some people also consider warlocks to be more corruptible, delving into darker magic which can potentially turn them evil.
And there's still one more problem with the names in general.
In communities which do not distinguish between wizards and warlocks, these terms are typically used to refer generally to male practitioners of magic.
We do have female moderators as well as male ones, which would mean that one additional title would need to be put in place just to fit the theme. Unfortunately, if they were to go with the generally accepted female equivalent to both male titles, "witch" doesn't possess a positive connotation in everyone's mind. Not to mention that it would get even more confusing should a female administrator join the team.
Do I have to go into why "Assassins" would not work as well or is that even necessary?
I was thinking maybe, in order from highest to lowest - King (admins), Prince (mods), Knights.
Again, the gender thing would pose a problem. The female moderators, for example, would either have to accept a male-specific title, or there would have to be two titles for the same job.
Secondly, giving them royal ranks does imply a certain level of superiority, and it could cause some users to see moderators and administrators as intimidating rather than helpful. It could just as easily raise users to ask the question, "What does that make us, peasants?" and thus feel inferior to moderators, admins and knights simply because of the titles chosen for their jobs. Hierarchy is okay, provided that users are well aware that the only hierarchy that exists in the system is the set of tools provided for each job.
Third and finally, if you have three ranks that sound similar (king, prince, knight), but only two of them have actual power to handle reports of spam, broken features, etc, it's very possible that knights would be bothered with reports of things that they could do anything about. "Moderator" and "Administrator" are universal internet terms that mean "Report things to this individual", but in a kingdom setting, a "rince" is usually thought of as an individual who has the world at their fingertips and doesn't give a rat's toaster about anyone else. Like the "Warlock" title, it could easily be seen as offensive, but it could also lead to confusion about who to report things to. Since a "knight" can imply nobility and willingness to help others, people may be more inclined to report things to them simply because the name sounds more like what a moderator actually is and does than "rince" does.
