Skip to main content

2023 Moderator Election

nomination began
Mar 28, 2023 at 20:00
election began
Apr 11, 2023 at 20:00
election cancelled
Apr 11, 2023 at 20:01
candidates
1
positions
1

On Stack Exchange, we believe the core moderators should come from the community, and be elected by the community itself through popular vote. We hold regular elections to determine who these community moderators will be.

Community moderators are accorded the highest level of privilege on our community, and should themselves be exemplars of positive behavior and leaders within the community.

Our general criteria for moderators is as follows:

  • patient and fair
  • leads by example
  • shows respect for their fellow community members in their actions and words
  • open to some light but firm moderation to keep the community on track and resolve (hopefully) uncommon disputes and exceptions

Full elections have three phases and an optional fourth phase (Primary):

  1. Question Collection
  2. Nomination
  3. Primary
  4. Election

Please participate in the moderator elections by voting, and perhaps even by nominating yourself to be a community moderator!

Additional Links

Questionnaire
The community team has compiled questions from meta for the candidates to answer.
  1. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?

[Answer 1 here]

  1. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?

[Answer 2 here]

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

[Answer 3 here]

  1. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?

[Answer 4 here]

  1. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching enough reputation to access moderator tools or become a trusted user?

[Answer 5 here]

WBT

I co-founded a residential community focused on sustainable living well before this SE site existed, renovated a house to showcase sustainable living technologies/tools/strategies, have been active in several relevant in-person groups discussing these topics, and continue with a strong interest in sustainability topics.  I’ve done a lot of reading about and study of platforms where very large groups of people can discuss solutions to very complex problems, such as and specifically including climate change.

By all-time rep, I'm not in the top 0.2% of users on this site, but I am in the 2% of users just below that tier, and I’ve been a member for well over 7 years. I’m also one of just 42 users with the Fanatic badge. Because I am not that active in writing content for the site (more in reading), this is your opportunity to vote for someone who can be a more neutral arbitrator of issues and disputes that come up due to not having a personal "dog in the fight" for most discussions.

Questionnaire
  1. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?

Assuming the flags are justified: Call out the specific behaviors, privately or publicly (the latter if others in a discussion could also benefit from the reminder of what's civil discussion) asking for correction or cooldown, and follow the normal ladder of rules enforcement.

Some extra attention to positive reinforcement of that user's good behaviors would likely be helpful too, and a steady stream of valuable answers suggests a potentially high return on "more like this, please" comments & feedback.

  1. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?

Discuss in mod chat, explaining my reasons and listening to others. My mind can be changed, and I suspect good reasons might be able to convince other mods too.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderators are human exception handlers for issues that can't be taken care of through the usual community-driven moderation process.

I can’t pledge to be super active and on here for several hours a day, but I can pledge to be fair in the actions I do take and not abuse the privileges.  Though I tend to stay pseudonymous for better physical safety, other communities that have trusted me with leadership roles (including open-source stewardship of packages with combined totals of tens of millions of weekly downloads for integration into a wide variety of applications) have consistently found that to be a good decision.

Mods also have a secondary role of being an interface point between the company formerly known as Stack Exchange and the community. In this secondary role, I also have the benefit of enough technical background to dive into, diagnose, and advocate more specifically & effectively for fixes to user experience & interface bugs in the platform.

  1. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?

Fine.

  1. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching enough reputation to access moderator tools or become a trusted user?

I won't likely be reaching 5K rep anytime soon, though I do have over 40K rep network-wide. My highest-rep site is Meta Stack Exchange, so it's not like I'm completely inactive in meta discussions, even if I'm less active on this site specifically.

This election is over.