There is a worrying trend to spend disproportionate amount of time on the worst members of the community, usually at the expense of the best.
What makes more sense? To focus on your unhappy members or your happy members? Does it make sense to spend hours resolving one unhappy member. It's perfectly ok to boot out the members that aren't happy (or disruptive). They're not your target audience.
The happy members are the ones that refer others. They generate a disproportionate amount of activity. They are the rocks that the sense of community is based on. If they're not happy, if they leave, they take the community with them.
The worst members prick your ego. It's tempting to spend ages to get them out of the community. You want to prove you're right. But it's also a tragic waste of your time. Far better to put the ego side, spend more time on your best members, and no more than a few minutes on the worst.
Working with your best members to improve the community, give them ownership over areas, plan future events/activities, find out what they think would be terrific, has a much more beneficial longer-term impact. It is always a better use of your time.
You shouldn't know your worst members better than you know your best.
