My philosophy on moderation is in close agreement with "A Theory of Moderation". In particular, I think the description of moderators as "human exception handlers" is superb. I favor a light touch, but I am willing to take firm action if necessary.

If I am elected moderator and later involved in a dispute, I will ask other mod(s) (and/or the community, via meta) to help resolve it.

I am willing to support community consensus even if I personally disagree with it.

Reasons to vote for me

1. I've been an active (helpful) flagger across the SE network (I have the Marshal badge on SFF.SE, EE.SE, and SO).
2. I'm an active reviewer across the SE network (8 Steward badges between SFF.SE, EE.SE, and SO).
3. I'm an active editor across the SE network (Copy Editor badge on SFF.SE and EE.SE).
4. I'm active on meta and familiar with community consensus on a variety of topics.
5. I've never had my account suspended on any site in the SE network.

Reasons not to vote for me

1. There are already a sufficient number of good candidates to fill the 2 mod positions available.
2. I'm available on most days but not as much during the weekends.

Hehehe. Why not? I won't win, but I can still run...

Reasons to vote for me:

• I’m an active participant in the site. I'm on almost all day and hang out in the review queues occasionally.

• I’ll moderate lightly. I won’t impose any big changes – mostly light work around the edges.

• My record is clean - no suspensions, chat bans, etc.

• ...Because I want you to.

Reasons to vote for somebody else:

• I’m not very active in Chat and Meta. If i wind up elected, I’ll try to be better at this.

• I'm not very experienced.

• The others are probably more qualified.

I'm SSumner, and if I'm elected president I will balance the budget, cut taxes, and...what do you meant this is the wrong campaign forum? You mean the others aren't just sockpuppets of Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, and J.K. Rowling? Oh well, I guess I'll run for this anyway.

I was going to post reasons to vote for me, and reasons to not vote for me, but looks like 3 people beat me to that, so oh well here it goes:

Reasons For

• I have good experience with the existing moderator tools - I was the first to accumulate 3 Steward badges on the site, I have more helpful flags than anyone else (806, against 39 declined), and I provide a good number of helpful edits

• I am moderately active on meta and in chat, and have a well-received record of questions and (mostly) answers on meta

• I've been around for several years, and have a good understanding of how the community operates

Reasons Against

• I already use the existing moderator tools a good bit

• I am not as active on meta on chat as I have been in the past

• I'm not very visible - my main site question and answering is fairly slow nowadays, and most of my work is done lurking or in the review queue

I’ll give it a go.

Reasons to vote for me:

• I’m an active participant in the site. I visit multiple times a day and hang out in the review queues when I’m not working.

• I’ve had a dupehammer in the [harry-potter] tag for over a year. I’ve got some experience using mod-like tools, and I’d like to think I’ve been using them responsibly.

• I’ll moderate with a soft touch. I won’t impose big sweeping changes – mostly light janitorial work around the edges.

• You want to nobble my ability to answer Harry Potter questions by taking up my time with moderation.

Reasons to vote for somebody else:

• I already do a lot of moderator-like stuff with the standard tools. Other candidates may be able to put the extra moderator tools to better use.

• I tend towards specialising in a small number of topics. You may want a moderator with a baseline participation in a wider variety of areas.

• I’m not very active in Chat and Meta (or at least, not as much as I used to be), although I feel like I still have a good handle on community policy and consensus. Given the recent issues, especially in Chat, this may be a problem. If elected, I’ll try to be better at this.

Alright, I'ma throw my hat in.

What I am

You're here for a pitch; why I have the gall to suggest I might be a less-than-terrible moderator. Well, here you go:

• Generally active. I've visited the site on 537 days. I've been a member of the site since July 31, 2014, which was 538 days ago. I'm here a lot
• Pretty open about policy. I have my opinions, but I also know that my voice is not The Voice. I'm okay with enforcing policy decisions I disagree with, and limiting disagreement to bilateral discussions only
• Accepting of criticism. I'm not perfect, and I'm not afraid to admit that. I try to keep an open mind, and accept criticisms and corrections graciously

What I am not

Obviously I want you to vote for me, but I want you to do it with eyes open; I'm not perfect:

• Familiar with online moderation. I try to be a good person as best I can, but I don't have much of a resume
• Experienced with binding votes. I don't have a dupehammer (yet), so the modhammer would be a big adjustment for me
• Always friendly-sounding. I can be terse, which is sometimes off-putting to people. It's something I'm working on in my life in general

Please take a moment to review my platform before voting!

While I have been a contributor to SF&F for a long time, this past year I took a much more active interest in the "care and feeding" of the site and its community.

As a contributor, I have done my best to help maintain the quality of our content. I try to be welcoming to new users, to show them how to make better contributions, and to be fair and objective when making decisions.

I also contribute regularly to the blog, and have a vested interest in the continued, peaceful operation of Mos Eisley.

As a moderator, I would continue to take all of those responsibilities seriously.

One of my favorite words to use these days is consensus. A happy, healthy community is all about cooperation and consensus, and as a moderator I would do my best to bring out that cooperation, and to reach that consensus, to make all of our experiences better.

My Highlights:

• Tag Wars: The Science Fiction/Fantasy Tag Cleanup Event
• What is our actual policy on science questions?
• Gorilla vs. Shark - a Longer Explanation

What I have to offer.

Active presence in chat 7 days a week, morning till the wee hours of the AM.

Active contributor in multiple topics.

Have experienced Mod Hammer on my own head, and I know how it can feel for some, to have less that adequate reasons as to WHY action was taken against you.

A relatively new user, with only 1 1/2 years on this site, leaves me free from some older baggage, assumptions, and not tied to old meta decisions by users no longer active.

What I would strive to do.

Offer clear reasoning for all Mod actions taken.

Start discussions on old meta questions that may be out of date for our current users expectations and needs for this site.

Closing old Meta questions as Dupes to new questions if necessary.

Provide a stable hand to help Mos Eisley stay a pleasurable environment for its users.

Encourage new users, by actively explaining why questions are downvoted/closed/etc.

What can you expect for me to not change about myself.

I will continue to speak in Himarm'ese.

I will continue to joke and have good nature'd fun in Mos Eisley and not become aloof or removed from "normal" non-mod users.

Pro-Watership Down advocate

Campaign Promise

If elected, social issues will never be discussed anywhere ever again.

Better public transportation? Protecting the environment? Where will it end? I'll tell you where, with me.

Campaign Dark Secret:

Many Bothans died to bring us this information.

For the serious minded:

I am typically on 5-6 days a week, participating in chat, answering questions, and trying to keep the peace.

We have a blog (spoiler alert). I am the coordinator and thanks to the contributions of regular users and myself our site blog has more posts more consistently than any other blog on the StackExchange, bar the main blog.

I still struggle to make a good election blurb without adding some humor (I can't help myself), but I do take the importance of the quality and character of the site seriously.

I stand by my record, 3 elections and 0 corruption. 1 2 3

I like this site and put a lot into it, so I'll throw my hat in too.

My approach to the site

When I first joined, I didn't post much for a long time while learning the customs and etiquette. Now I'm more confident in helping to shape community consensus, though still ready to accept guidance from moderators and more experienced users.

In 2016, I've decided to stop caring about rep and devote more time to encouraging others and helping to manage the site. I'm now more open-handed with bounties and less consistent with the repcap, and raised 200 helpful flags just in the last 1-2 months.

I try to get on with everyone, even maintaining rapport with people who can't stand each other. Although ready to call people out when they act inappropriately, I always try to do so in a way that gets the point across reasonably while minimising offence.

My activity

I'm one of the most active users on both main site and meta, active nearly every evening and often through the day too. Being in the UK, I'm online even when most of the current moderators are asleep.

For around a year I've been a familiar face in chat, and in recent months I've been one of those working hard to keep it calm there.