I agree that it is more work to set it up, but this work only needs to be done once and can probably be assigned to the volunteer bug moderators. Dwarf Fortress worked with a bug report forum just like this one for years, but now I don't think they would ever go back to that. The advantages are a benefit for everyone.
At work, several teams in my department uses JIRA for analytics requests and we also use Confluence for IT projects, so I am familiar with the type of software involved. I avoid them personally because my experience has been that they create a bureaucratic wall between the stakeholders and the delivery department, but if the various teams believe they can make it work I am not going to stand in their way. I always deal direct with people by email or instant chat because it works better for me and that personal connection helps a lot I need their help. My philosophy is always the least amount of process necessary to get the job done.
I am hoping that the moderator concept will keep communication flowing in an easy way but enable me to spend my own time more effectively. I'm not trying to make Aurora players into professional testers - I just need a low process approach that can handle the fact they are not.
With all due respect, Steve, and having suffered under such idiocy myself at work, the moderator system itself is that very 'bureaucratic wall', not whichever software tool happens to be in use. The problems happen when the lines of communication are cut off entirely, which in my experience is invariably due to incompetence and petty turf wars among management, and frankly I haven't seen any of that from your team. As long as there is open communication between yourself, your mods, and us players, so that systemic problems can be brought to light and dealt with, then the system will continue to work as intended. As for what tool is used, whether the old bug thread, the new bug forum, or a more specialized system, that really comes down to workload, and time will tell.
Cheers.