Normally I'd wait for an example question to pop up before starting this sort of scoping discussion on meta, but in this case it might be in our best interest to set a policy beforehand.
This site is stacked with SE network site moderators and users who moderate other sites. It's to be expected that some people, when faced with a particularly difficult decision, might consider submitting their dilemma as a question here, in effect asking: "I have a situation here, what should I do?"
Giving out this type of advice publicly could be inappropriate, depending on the circumstance. Certainly in some cases it's inappropriate for a moderator to make internal discussions public.
On Stack Exchange, users are expected to be responsible for things like protecting their own copyrights. However, moderators typically have access to an exceptional amount of information about members of their community and about internal discussions from other communities (not limited to SE network sites). If I had to deal with a disruptive user as part of a moderation team, the last thing I would want is for someone on that team to post any of the team's ongoing internal discussions, or for any official action or decision to be unduly influenced by some other community.
Do we want to be responsible for advising moderators on pending or active issues, i.e., where no action has been taken yet and they are essentially asking us to help moderate their site?
If not, are we okay with reviewing moderator actions after the fact?