This question already has an answer here:
Yesterday in a SE site there was an answer claiming that the accepted and upvoted answer was blatantly wrong and there was a gross mistake.
The poster revealed that the accepted answer was by a sockpuppet of a mod, and that he was aware that there was at least one more alias of his.
The correcting answer was deleted twice, and we'll never know if the accepted answer is misleading or not.
I was just wondering if this practice is acceptable. I suppose (or rather hope) that that mod refrains from upvoting his sock's posts, but what happened indicates that a mod can easily impose his own views (even when they are probably wrong).
Could someone who is in charge of mods clarify if such practice is tolerated or should be reported.
It seems necessary to specify that this question is not insinuating anything, let alone suggesting a conspiracy by anyone. I simply and faithfully reported a fact, something I witnessed, that raises some questions. I appreciated the answers but, if a Manager thinks the episode deserves investigation I'll report to them (and only to them) the details of the incident through a discreet and confidential channel.
It is deplorable that this question continues to be misread or misinterpreted after so many comments and clarifications, I can't see what information can be gained if I disclose the site and the question, since there is nothing wrong there to be seen, and you need 10k+ rep in that particular site in order to read deleted stuff and you have to be a TM if you want to check multiple accounts.
I regret, also, that somebody insists on the conspiracy string and that the simplicity of the title has warranted a deliberately wrong, restrictive, literal interpretation of this question as a duplicate. I'll ask a new question, of course mods can have multiple accounts, as long as they do not protect them abusing of their priviledges.