- 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?
I have experience with such users over at Earth Science. I take a patient and constructive approach, but will remove comments where necessary. If it becomes too bad, I might write a moderator message to discuss the problem with them.
- How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?
In most cases I would just leave it. If I feel strongly about it, I would address it in the moderator chatroom.
- Since Covid started early 2020, participation on Sustainable Living SE has declined somewhat. What do you think is the best way to increase this again and make sure the site continues to grow?
We need good content and good contributors. We already have this, but we can have more. I'm not sure what the best way is to get more of it.
- Suppose a user posts several plausible answers on a topic you are less familiar with and nicely backs those answers up with references. On closer inspection it turns out that all references link to research funded by organisations that are known to be climate change deniers. What do you do?
As a user, It depends. If the answer is wrong or (worse) harmful, I would downvote and leave a comment explaining my downvote. If the answer is right, I would leave a comment asking if they could find other references to avoid possible confusion.
None of this requires moderator privileges. I wouldn't do anything that requires moderator privileges.
- You (a moderator) and another community member both answer a question on the main site. The other answer is well written but (objectively) incorrect, and has gathered a similar amount of upvotes to yours. What do you do?
As a user, I would downvote the other answer and leave a comment why it is incorrect.
I wouldn't do anything that requires moderator privileges.
- In your opinion, what do moderators do?
First of all, moderators are users. Good moderators do what good users do. They contribute with questions, answers, votes, proposals on meta, and in other ways.
In the best of worlds, they do nothing that needs moderator privileges, because the best communities are self-moderating.
Communities are made of people. People aren't perfect, and therefore communities are also not perfect. A moderator is a gatekeeper who takes action if really necessary. They serve the community by cleaning up what needs to be cleaned up, speeding up moderation tasks that would take too long if done by non-moderators, preventing conflicts or de-escalating them where they do arise. This list is not exhaustive.
Moderators are also the contact between the community and Stack Exchange. If the community needs something from Stack Exchange, the moderators can address staff for assistance.
- 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?
I think it's a bit of an overstatement that everything I do will be seen in a different light. I hope people will still value my content for what it is. Above all, I'm still a user.
- In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
By being among a small number of highly privileged users, I will feel more responsible and take more action than I would with reputation-earned privileges. Reaching 10k is not simple on this site; only 3 people have. Nobody has reached 20k.