2016 Moderator Election

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

Every election has three phases:

  1. Nomination
  2. Primary
  3. Election

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

This election ended Feb 2 '16 at 20:00.

Anyone may download the election data. Voters have access to pre-built OpenSTV software to audit the results; all others may use this source distribution.

4,242 voters were eligible, 1,655 visited the site during the election, 1,309 visited the election page, and 588 voted

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.

  • The current trend seems to be for candidates to post reasons why we should think twice about voting for them. What would you put in this category? – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 17:19
  • @Richard I had a lot more in my nomination before - the 1200-character limit is a pain! To answer your question though: I'm fairly new, with less than 2 years' experience of the site (although I've been lurking since 2012), and don't have much rep compared to some of the other candidates. There's a lot of good mod material on this page, and my chances probably aren't too high... – Rand al'Thor Jan 23 '16 at 17:39
  • So we can add brevity to that list :-) But seriously, I wouldn't see either of those as a major downside. I'd far rather have someone who's actively involved in answering/asking questions, something that's decidedly lacking in many of the candidates and quite a few of the existing mods. – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 17:44
  • @Richard I realize this isn't exactly the right venue, but I'm interested in why you feel that way. How do you see active asking/answering tying into good moderation? – Jason Baker Jan 23 '16 at 19:10
  • @JasonBaker - Part of the remit of a moderator is that they should lead by example. In my mind that includes actually using the site for what it was intended, as a Q&A forum. – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 19:26
  • You are currently suspended on another site for a year. You've bemoaned this in your chat since it occurred. You have mentioned that mods and CMs made a bad decision in performing this action and continued to do so since the suspension started. How will you interact with these mods and CMs if you are elected? Will you be able to perform your tasks effectively as a leader of not just SFF but SE as a whole and interact with these other leaders in a way that is positive for SFF? – Andy Jan 23 '16 at 20:05
  • While true that rand al'thor has certain items in his history that can't be ignored (namely: Andy's comment, above), it's also very true that I've seen change for the much better over recent months. – ArtOfCode Jan 23 '16 at 20:53
  • @JasonBaker It's easier for some users to respect a person who produces high-quality posts than one who has full diamond powers but doesn't contribute visibly to the site. Someone who's not familiar with the SE system (and the tough gig it is to be a mod) might think "who are you to tell me what to do, when I contribute more Q&A than you?" Ideally a mod should be respected without having to enforce respect. – Rand al'Thor Jan 23 '16 at 22:27
  • @Andy I've put those events behind me now, and my loyalty is to SFF. I'm confident that I'll be able to behave respectfully towards CMs and mods from across the network; I won't let this site down if I'm elected. Not only do I have plenty of experience at being polite and respectful even to those I disagree with (as mentioned in my nomination), but also people and their opinions can change. ArtOfCode is a good example: his incorrect validation of a flag on me in chat was how we first met, but no grudges were borne and now we get on very well :-) – Rand al'Thor Jan 23 '16 at 22:34
  • @randal'thor do you still feel that your suspension was a mistake? – user1807 Jan 23 '16 at 22:44
  • @Hamlet This probably isn't the right place for such a discussion. Ping me in chat if you want to ask me about it, but honestly I can't see how an issue from another site is relevant (beyond the question Andy raised of whether I'll be able to work well together with CMs and other mods, which I've already addressed) to the matter of whether or not I would be a good mod for SFF. – Rand al'Thor Jan 24 '16 at 2:14
  • im glad im not the only candidate who has been suspended this year :D – Himarm Jan 24 '16 at 7:16
  • @randal'thor - When you gain access to the super-secret 'Teacher's Lounge' chatroom, I suspect that you're going to flip your lid at the conversations that relate to your suspension. The question is whether that lid-flipping is going to be public and messy and reflect poorly on SFF:SE – Valorum Jan 24 '16 at 10:33
  • @Richard Thanks for the heads-up; I'm sure I'll be able to contain myself, especially since those conversations presumably have nothing to do with me as an SFF user. Stiff upper lip and all that ;-) Seriously, I have no intention of anything reflecting poorly on SFF.SE - otherwise I wouldn't have nominated myself. – Rand al'Thor Jan 24 '16 at 14:44
  • @randal'thor although I don't know the details of your suspension (and don't want to), the very fact that you are suspended means that you presumably broke the rules on another site. You can understand how, by itself, electing a moderator who is suspended on another site could lower people's perception of Scifi.SE? Even if you disagree with the suspension, in my opinion it's a dispute you would need to have resolved before being a moderator. Although you say that you will be impartial, electing you means there is a big risk that things could get personal – user1807 Jan 24 '16 at 17:51

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

  • Why has your use of meta/chat/asking & answering declined? Are you becoming less interested in the site? – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 0:15
  • Asking and answering its because my schedule changed about a year ago and I didn't have regular time for 45 mins-an hour to write an answer, rather it was like a couple minutes every hour or so. Meta I just haven't found anything to answer that didn't already have a good answer. Chat I just forgot about cause I was In the process of moving/settling in for the past couple months. As far as site interest, I would say it's the same as it's been for a long time, just life changes changed my involvement – The Fallen Jan 23 '16 at 0:26
  • I must confess that I have concerns over voting for someone who's only asked/answered a dozen or so questions in the last twelve months and hasn't been active on the main board for nearly an entire month. – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 0:32
  • I don't know what the main board is. As for my overall activity, I have never been super active in the question and answer department. I basically only answer Star Wars and Tolkien, and a lot of those answers get snatched up quickly. Much of my work has been done with the moderation tools. I understand some people see this as a bigger issue than others, I'm not perfect – The Fallen Jan 23 '16 at 0:40
  • By the "main board" I meant the bit of the site where people ask and answer questions. – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 0:44

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.
  • Hello. I wish you the best of luck for the election. Why did you feel you had to add up your SO and EE badges to the SFF ones ? That certainly looks like you want to balance with something else although your candidate score is high enough already. – Kalissar Jan 22 '16 at 15:04
  • If elected, would you spend as much time on your other sites as you do now? – Valorum Jan 22 '16 at 18:05
  • @Kalissar The point I was trying to make is that I have experience flagging and reviewing (i.e. mod-like activities) not just on this site but others. I think this extra experience from other sites will help me "hit the ground running" if I'm elected to be a mod. Also, it indicates that I care about the health of the SE sites beyond my own account's reputation. Obviously my activities on other sites are less important for this election than on SFF.SE, but I thought it was worth pointing out. – Null Jan 22 '16 at 19:20
  • @Richard I would reduce my time spent on other sites by the amount of time necessary to fulfill my mod duties, which would of course take precedence over flagging, reviewing, editing, etc. on other sites. As it is, I already spend most of my time on SFF.SE (I currently have ~24.3k rep here vs. ~3.4k rep on my next highest site, EE.SE). The fact that I already have gold badges for some of these tasks on other sites means I have less incentive to perform them anyway, so if these tasks were to compete for my time against my mod tasks here my mod tasks would easily win. – Null Jan 22 '16 at 19:26
  • Reason #5 to vote for you is interesting... On the one hand, I don't think a suspension on this (or another SE site) automatically disqualifies someone from being a mod. But on the other hand, given how much drama there's been here, I think the fairly recent suspensions of 2 other candidates is a concern. The fact that you're active on multiple sites without contributing to the drama is a huge positive for your candidacy. (And your candidate score here pretty much speaks for itself.) – Ward - Reinstate Monica Jan 25 '16 at 5:41
  • @Ward I agree that a suspension does not automatically disqualify a candidate from being a mod. However, the fact that I have not been suspended may serve as a tiebreaker criterion. – Null Jan 25 '16 at 6:09

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.

  • Having so little experience with the review queues, do you feel you're comfortable with proper handling of flagged items? – phantom42 Jan 21 '16 at 14:39
  • @phantom42 I hope so. If there's one thing i'm not sure about... there are other mods. :P – Mithical Jan 21 '16 at 15:02
  • Hypothetically speaking, would you vote for you? – Valorum Jan 21 '16 at 19:51
  • @Richard second choice. @ alexwlchan would be better, i think. – Mithical Jan 21 '16 at 19:56
  • Given the candidate base thus far, I sense that you aren't going to come last :-) – Valorum Jan 21 '16 at 20:12

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.

  • I'm so glad you've thrown your hat in the ring. I think you would make a conscientious, thorough, and fair moderator for our site. Argh, it's going to be hard to choose! But you are definitely one of my front runners. :) – Slytherincess Jan 20 '16 at 14:13
  • Given that you've actively highlighted some reasons not to vote for you, hypothetically speaking, would you vote for you or someone else? – Valorum Jan 20 '16 at 19:37
  • I disagree that experience with the tooling is a downside here. alexwlchan has demonstrated considerable experience with moderation here as well as on other Stack Exchange sites. And like Jason, he builds tooling of his own for the benefit of others. – Shog9 Jan 20 '16 at 21:54
  • Although you've said that I'm dead to you, I still think you'd make a great mod. You've always been fair but firm in any dealings I've had with you; best of luck. – Often Right Jan 21 '16 at 5:34
  • @Richard I'd still vote for myself, but I like to give a balanced picture. And if I don't call them out, somebody else probably would. – alexwlchan Jan 21 '16 at 23:55

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
  • Campaign promise: a shiny, precious ring for every constituent – Jason Baker Jan 20 '16 at 3:07
  • Holy moley, that's an impressive Candidate Score. – user1027 Jan 20 '16 at 3:20
  • I can say that I've seen you be very knowledgeable in meta. You've been involved in shaping and clearing up policies and consensus. I'm excited that you've nominated yourself. Good luck mate! – Möoz Jan 20 '16 at 4:55
  • Jason offers freedom from the tyranny of ignorance. 'Nuff said. – Shog9 Jan 20 '16 at 5:06
  • What kind of ring? – Valorum Jan 20 '16 at 7:12
  • I'm tempted to run now, just to see how much difficulty @Shog9 will have to go through find something nice to say about me :) And just to prove that the candidate score is more meaningless than not, given that both Wad and myself, utterly unsuitable to be moderators by our admissions, have same or better scores. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 20 '16 at 14:13
  • Also, while I don't have an opinion of you as potential moderator (not enough data), I have one thing to say: don't worry about dupehammer risk. If you aren't sure, you always can ask on Meta about any specific question; or simply let others vote - the site typically has enough active participants with close voting ability that it almost never requires binding votes. Also, I found much comfort in my DupeH wielding in knowing there are other Dupe able peers around to fix any mistakes I make. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 20 '16 at 14:17
  • May I have a philosopher's stone instead of a Precious? I was specifically hoping you would nominate yourself for mod, and here you've gone and done it! Now, back to constituent gifts ... As well as a philosopher's stone, I also accept cash donations and/or Amazon gift cards. Just sayin' :P – Slytherincess Jan 20 '16 at 14:20
  • @Richard The best kind of ring: the kind that will let you preserve the bliss and beauty of your land, with absolutely positively honest-to-goodness no side-effects – Jason Baker Jan 20 '16 at 16:01
  • @Slytherincess I'm sure we could work something out. Thanks for the kind words (which goes for everyone; I just don't want to flood the comments with all the @-replies); there are a lot of excellent nominees already, but I like to think I could do a decent job (candidate score tomfoolery aside) – Jason Baker Jan 20 '16 at 16:04

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

  • I noted that you only have 3 out of the 8 moderation badges. Are you planning to increase your overall activity in this area? – Valorum Jan 19 '16 at 21:08
  • @Richard increased activity in the flagged department yes, in the editing department not so much due to my personal lack of spelling ability. Luckily our edit crew works hard to keep things up to date. As a mod of course i will move to speedily resolve mod related flags that may be raised on questions. (im also out of room in my statement to add any of this) – Himarm Jan 19 '16 at 21:12
  • Himarm has certainly hit the ground running in the (relatively) short time he's been here, building an impressive record of contributions on the site and even a respectable amount of meta participation. However, I've observed an occasional lack of self-awareness, particularly in chat. It is important that a moderator is able to step back from his own participation and observe the effect it has on others, correcting if need-be. – Shog9 Jan 19 '16 at 21:30
  • A Further piece of info not able to fit on my opening statement, is that I was a raid leader in world of warcraft for 2 years in which i handled 24 other people 2 nights a week as we battled dragons, and demons to victory, and phat loot. – Himarm Jan 19 '16 at 21:58
  • Will you make bad spelling and grammar compulsory on this site? – Rand al'Thor Jan 19 '16 at 22:17
  • @randal'thor yes, yes I will... – Himarm Jan 19 '16 at 22:19
  • If you're elected, will you share your phat loot with us? – Valorum Jan 19 '16 at 22:51
  • @Richard the Phat loot will rain down upon my followers. – Himarm Jan 19 '16 at 22:52
  • Hmm. Bribery goes down very well indeed with this voter. – Valorum Jan 19 '16 at 23:18
  • I think we've all seen examples of how statements made by perceived authority figures can be interpreted differently by different people. I understand your desire to stay relateable, especially in chat, but how do you intend to handle those types of situations? – Jason Baker Jan 19 '16 at 23:26
  • @JasonBaker I think each scenario will be slightly different in dealing with things like this, but generally if something i say comes off wrongly and someone mentions it to me, i will be glad to edit, rephrase, or explain my meaning. If needs be i will delete the offending comment and allow chat to move on. The same with any other user who says something and its its taken in the wrong light, or while not meaning toon appears offensive, in some instances a breif discussion to clear the water, in others simply delete the offending comment, explaining why i did so. – Himarm Jan 20 '16 at 1:16
  • to supplement that, im not afraid of saying im wrong, or saying sorry if i miss handle a situation. something sometimes dont get from authority figures. as seen in some of my meta posts i own up to my mistakes as much as possible. – Himarm Jan 20 '16 at 1:19
  • I'd like to add that whilst Himarm has said things that could be deemed inappropriate he is always willing to rescind those comments once the possible inappropriate interpretation has been pointed out. – CandiedMango Jan 20 '16 at 6:06
  • Based on other meta posts that I've read in the past you seem to be a fairly popular contributor. That being said I would never support your bid for moderator. I'm gravely concerned about giving you moderation privileges since you were recently censured for having a sock puppet account. If you weren't able to stop yourself from doing something that was clearly wrong, how can we trust you with expanded moderation privileges? – Erik Jan 20 '16 at 19:55
  • @Erik I'm sorry you feel that way. I made the instance as transparent as possible and gave a public apology, their really is nothing else for me to do at this point, but to continue to live on the straight and narrow. – Himarm Jan 21 '16 at 13:07

I will make sure most topics are heard and will encourage their questions to be edited; rather than, removed on first glance because "I think" there is all ready something similar to it. This will definitely allow it to be a bit more open.

Additionally, I will try to moderate for people who are trying to start an argument on here by being smartasses; rather than, making a better attempt or offering an attempt to answer the original poster's comments.

With upholding the current rules and regulation as well as taking out the bias that most moderators of the past have missed, I will try my best to make sure everyone is heard.

If the above does not satisfy you, my loyalty IS with Stack Exchange as I had received a t-shirt from them and have worn it at least once a week, in public, every chance that I could.

  • With 1 helpful flag, 2 votes cast, and 0 posts edited over 3 years, how well do you feel that you know about what sort of content should be encouraged/discouraged, or generally cleaned up from the site? – phantom42 Jan 19 '16 at 13:42
  • Looking back at your comments on your nomination last year, have your views/opinions/plans changed? – phantom42 Jan 19 '16 at 14:07
  • What is your opinion on the current rules and regulations related to closing posts that are off topic? – Andy Jan 19 '16 at 17:48
  • Wearing a shirt is nice, but I'd be more interested in the content of Stack Exchange. How seriously are we supposed to take somebody who makes a language blunder in the opening statement of the nomination? "there is all ready" should have been "there is already". I realize that language standards have dipped, but this simply shows carelessness in a time when polish would have been appropriate. I see a member for 3 years with 0k reputation, 0/8 moderation badges, 0/6 editing badges. – TOOGAM Jan 19 '16 at 18:26
  • @TOOGAM Perfect English isn't a requirement to be a mod. Other mods can help proofread and edit messages made by a mod who has English as a second language. – user1027 Jan 19 '16 at 18:37
  • @Keen ha ha... I'm only laughing because I think that the reality is people who learn EASL are even less likely to make the particular mistake that Arvin did, as this oversight requires familiarity with the conceptual word "already" but typically involves relatively little exposure to properly written words compared to the amount of exposure people have to audible words. (As for the rest of your comment, I don't mean to laugh at that. I think that was suitably addressed that in my 4th, and second-last, sentence.) – TOOGAM Jan 19 '16 at 19:04
  • @TOOGAM "in a time when polish would have been appropriate" - no, the language of this site is English, not Polish ;-) – Rand al'Thor Jan 19 '16 at 19:33
  • I'm interested to know whether you genuinely feel that your nomination is sensible in light of the site's past challenges. Would you vote for you? – Valorum Jan 19 '16 at 21:09
  • Your only activity on meta was one post being migrated. For that matter, you haven't been seen on meta since May of last year (when said post was migrated). How familiar would you say you are with the challenges that the site is facing and the rules (that you mention you wish to follow) that have evolved to help guide the community? Moderation is much more than acting with a heavy hand (a light touch may be preferred with an active community). – user12183 Jan 20 '16 at 3:37
  • In addition to what others have said, having minimal moderation activity on the site (understandable due to your lower reputation and thus not having access to the tools): How do you feel you'll handle being handed effectively every unlockable privilege (and then some) if you become a moderator? To put it another way: Do you feel your lack of expertise in these tools (closing, deleting, protecting etc) will affect your ability to moderate, especially given you will be able to override consensuses given by other users? – Robotnik Jan 20 '16 at 5:41
  • This candidate score was so low, it got me wondering how to check mine. Turns out this has been asked and answered on meta. For the record, mine's currently 0, and I do meet the minimum eligibility requirements (barely), so it is possible to have a candidate with a lower score. :-) – T.E.D. Jan 20 '16 at 14:56
  • This comment trail is looking very one-sided. – Valorum Jan 20 '16 at 19:39
  • @Richard one would hope that with asking these questions, if Avrin were to not be elected as moderator on this election, he could have some specific ideas of what to do for the next election. The questions asked here are things that people are concerned about - in particular a lack of experience. And while it is unlikely that he will be elected on this time, one would hope that he would become more active in the community (which is good in of itself) so that the next time an election comes up, can point to all the things that he's done and used the moderation tools he has (votes, flags). – user12183 Jan 21 '16 at 2:47
  • @MichaelT unfortunately, the criticisms and concerns most of us have are the same ones we had last year when he ran. since then, his stats and participation have not changed in any appreciable way, which says a lot given how low they are to begin with. – phantom42 Jan 21 '16 at 3:41
  • Not only have you not addressed anyone's concerns, but as of right now, you haven't been seen on the site in the 2 days since posting your nomination. Is this the sort of activity level we can expect from you if you were to be made mod? – phantom42 Jan 21 '16 at 14:42

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

  • My vote goes to you. – 11.01.11 Jan 19 '16 at 6:50
  • How would your mod duties affect your blog schedule? Is there a conflict of separation of blog and state? – phantom42 Jan 19 '16 at 13:58
  • we have a blog? – KutuluMike Jan 19 '16 at 14:04
  • @phantom42 He meant to say that he has got experience as he is coordinator. – 11.01.11 Jan 19 '16 at 14:11
  • @phantom42 Just like being Sheldon Cooper's mortal enemy, it doesn't take up much of my time. youtube.com/watch?v=PiX4T0bIDBo&t=1m38s – Jack B Nimble Jan 19 '16 at 14:35
  • Running the blog takes a lot of dedication, more than most folks expect - as evidenced by the number of rather quiet blogs around. Jack has demonstrated the ability to be aware of goings on within the community outside of his particular area of expertise, a valuable skill for a moderator and potentially an asset to the team as they look to strengthen their involvement in areas of moderation related to community building. – Shog9 Jan 19 '16 at 17:11
  • Don't let Jack fool you, he is very dedicated to this site, good at building the community together, treats everyone equally (Even if we are all dead to him), and would do well. He'd be a valuable candidate for sure. – PearsonArtPhoto Jan 19 '16 at 20:39
  • If you're elected mod, how often would you declare that the community is dead to you? – Ryan Jan 19 '16 at 20:42
  • I noted that you only have 3 out of the 8 moderation badges. Are you planning to increase your overall activity in this area? – Valorum Jan 19 '16 at 21:10
  • @Richard Yes. I was looking at those today and I will be more proactive in those areas. – Jack B Nimble Jan 19 '16 at 22:29
  • Running a blog is far harder than it seems. There was at least one not-crystal-clear situation with the blog, and Jack to his credit handled it with maturity, wisdom, and sensitivity. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 20 '16 at 14:19
  • ;) shouldn't the spoiler alert come before the spoiler? – Erik Jan 20 '16 at 19:58
  • If you win, will you still have time to manage the blog, or will you hand it over to a non-mod to handle? – Rand al'Thor Jan 22 '16 at 2:57
  • @randal'thor if someone else is interested in managing the blog I would be willing allow them to. I have been managing it for three years, and it might be good to let someone else take the initiative on it. But to answer your question, I don't believe the blog takes enough of my time that it would be neglected as a result of mod duties. – Jack B Nimble Jan 22 '16 at 18:00
  • @randal'thor - Realistically, some mods spent far less than 30 mins a day on moderation duties. I can't imagine that the blog would suffer in the slightest if Jack were to become a mod. – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 0:19

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 obsessions aside, Mike is an experienced member of the site with the skill to step outside the sphere of his own prejudices and evaluate even the most intractable problems... If brought to bear on the problems of moderation, this would be a valuable asset to the community here. – Shog9 Jan 19 '16 at 0:32
  • How can you promise me fair judgement if you have history of morally wrong thing which you proved right based on bureaucracy (Yes, Bifrost event is in my mind)? My vote won't go to you unless you clear this point... – 11.01.11 Jan 19 '16 at 6:55
  • @SS-3 I don't want to come off like I'm ignoring you but honestly I feel like that issue has been hashed and rehashed enough; I made my case in the meta post Keen just posted and I still stand by it. I feel like the CM's final resolution (including a citation crediting you for the idea in my question) was fair, and probably ought to have been there from the start, but based on how things played out I didn't, and still don't, believe I did anything "morally or legally wrong". If you feel otherwise, I'm disappointed, but I doubt more talking will convince you to change your mind. – KutuluMike Jan 19 '16 at 14:22
  • As a key member of the recent 'tagging crusade', would you be looking to pursue this with as much vigour or would you put it on the back burner while you get to grips with your new modly duties? – Valorum Jan 19 '16 at 21:12
  • I would expect that, initially, I would want to cut back on that effort while I adjusted to how much work was involved in doing the moderation, but since it was an idea that got broad support, I would definitely not abandon it. A large part of that effort is simply trying to pin down how the community thinks we should use tags in the first place, and that's something that, as a moderator, I would still pursue. Even if that's all that comes out of that effort -- a clear idea of a tagging policy we can all agree on and enforce going forward, I'd consider it a success. – KutuluMike Jan 19 '16 at 21:23
  • The actual mechanical task of retagging questions is something I'm also interested in moving forward with. However, with the limited experience so far I've still not gotten a good handle on how big that's effort is going to be on it's own, so I can't give a better answer there. – KutuluMike Jan 19 '16 at 21:25
  • With the amount of dedication you've put into the site's background work, especially recently, I'm excited to see that you've nominated yourself. good luck mate! – Möoz Jan 20 '16 at 4:56
  • Cthulhu for president, ehm, moderator! – Wrzlprmft Jan 20 '16 at 15:48
  • I am not active on the main site here, I am only active in Mos Eisley. Mike has always demonstrated to me that he has a genuine concern for the site and is always knowledgeable and helpful with any questions that I have had on any given topic. Also, Mike appears to be readily available and he is constantly present in Mos Eisley. Any dealings that I have ever had with Mike have been met with willingness to help coupled with a sense of humor. – steelersquirrel Jan 22 '16 at 19:51
  • @Richard Having had some time to think about your question, and also talk it over with some people with more experience that I, I can say that it's almost certain that becoming a moderator would alter the way I approach those kinds of issues. As I said, I would definitely not want to abandon the effort to bring clarity and consistency to some of our less-well-understood policies. And I already try very hard to separate my own opinion, from the decisions I'm trying to get made. As a mod, I would need to be very careful not to exert undue influence over those kinds of questions. – KutuluMike Jan 23 '16 at 23:47
  • @MikeEdenfield - I rather suspect that you're starting to sense that the major problem is that you'd be the only mod who seems to be showing any interest in it. – Valorum Jan 23 '16 at 23:49
  • That may be true. But a lot of other users seemed interested in it, so perhaps having a mod that shared their concerns would be a good thing. I'll just have to do what I can to make those users aware of these issues, and how voting/not voting for me would affect them. If long-term people think I'm better off being tag-cleanup-guy than flag-clearing-guy, that's not the worst thing to happen to me in the past year :) – KutuluMike Jan 23 '16 at 23:50

This election is complete.