I apologize for assuming that you missed the part about Sisko being complicit. I thought that your conclusion would have been different had you taken that into account. I shouldn't have assumed that.

I really hate moral quandries

Maybe this series isn't your cup of tea? Since I like moral quandries, the writing seems fine to me. In fact, for me, it's better than most since most series don't even try to contain any moral ambiguity.

I don't think the whole DS9 crew would be willing to take that risk.

I do think the whole crew would be willing to take that risk. I base that on other episodes where the whole crew go on a mission, risking everyone's lives for one person's project or experiment or even their mistake.

I pondered whether that was realistic or not while I was watching it. I think there are a couple factors that make it more believable, after thinking about it. This group of people are self-selected to be interested in exploration. They're willing to risk their lives for what they find. Banding together to protect everyone equally is also a survival technique. They're more powerful as a group than individually. If that means defending a bone-headed mistake of one crew member, it's still the guiding principle. Also, while life is still fragile, medical technology is so advanced that dying is less likely. That makes risk-taking slightly less risky.

An episode from TNG had me thinking about the mindset of the crew a lot. In that episode, the crew found several people in cryogenic stasis. One person revived them through one of those bone-headed errors by a crew member, then the rest of the crew had to deal with it. After the doctor fixed all their medical maladies, she said something about them that stayed with me.

"Too afraid to live, too scared to die." or words to that effect.

To me, it meant that the people on the starship had decided what they were willing to die for. It gave them purpose and meaning. They were willing to risk their lives for what they believed in, and that included each other.