10

In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected from an earlier thread have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers.

Due to the submission count, we have selected all provided questions as well as our back up questions for a total of 10 questions.

As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes. Please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.

Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.

Good luck to all of the candidates!

Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.

To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):


  1. Moderators are not selected because they are domain experts in certain tags, but it so happens that you are an expert in one such tag. You see that several members of the community have elected to close a question as a duplicate, but you see that the duplicates don't actually answer the question as stated, nor do they provide a useful signpost for the asker. How do you proceed?

  2. In your opinion, what is the biggest problem/challenge Sports Stack Exchange is currently facing? How would you propose to solve it?

  3. Activity on Sports seems to decline as of late; if you were elected, what would you try to do about this? Or do you feel this isn't the job of a ♦ moderator at all?

  4. 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?

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

  6. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

  7. 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?

  8. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

  9. Sports SE has comparatively few users with higher privileges (only 16 users > 5K, only 40 users > 2K, out of ~650 users > 2H and ~12000 users total).
    This can sometimes mean questions aren't closed, answers aren't deleted, or other key site actions that should be managed by the community don't occur.
    Please outline your expectation for taking binding moderator actions in such cases, versus waiting for the community to perform these tasks.

  10. There is a high-rep user who is very active on the site, but frequently uses strong language which violates the Code of Conduct in their comments. When you warned them, they replied stating that the questions are of low quality which is why they left those comments. They also threatened to quit the site. Despite the warning, they continue to post similar comments. What steps, if any, will you take in order to address this situation? What if the comments were on Meta instead of main? Does that change your approach at all?

| |
8

Philip Kendall

  1. Moderators are not selected because they are domain experts in certain tags, but it so happens that you are an expert in one such tag. You see that several members of the community have elected to close a question as a duplicate, but you see that the duplicates don't actually answer the question as stated, nor do they provide a useful signpost for the asker. How do you proceed?

This would depend on how sure I am of my own judgement in the particular case. If it's something where I'm "absolutely" sure that the suggested duplicate is incorrect, then I would (in order) leave a comment explaining why I believe the close votes are wrong and saying what I'm about to do, and then use my moderator powers to clear out the close votes, as this ensures that a question which should remain open stays open. I'd then at least try and check in on the question over the next few days just in my my "absolute" certainty was wrong.

If it were a question where I'm less sure that the suggested duplicate is incorrect, I'd just behave as a normal user would and comment, explaining why I believe the suggested duplicate to be incorrect.

  1. In your opinion, what is the biggest problem/challenge Sports Stack Exchange is currently facing? How would you propose to solve it?

  2. Activity on Sports seems to decline as of late; if you were elected, what would you try to do about this? Or do you feel this isn't the job of a ♦ moderator at all?

I'll take these two together as the answers are going to be pretty much the same.

The biggest problem for Sports is (and pretty much has been since the site started) a lack of high quality questions. When we get a high quality question, it almost always receives a high quality answer, but there just aren't enough high quality questions. For avoidance of doubt, I don't think we have a particular problem with low quality questions, but neither would I advocate lowering our quality bar simply to increase the number of questions.

Is this the role of a moderator to fix? To me, the answer depends on why we think we lack high quality questions - if it's because of a toxic attitude on the site which discourages users from participating, then that's absolutely within the role of moderators to take the lead and ensure that inappropriate behaviour is discouraged. On the other hand, if the lack of questions is simply due to a lack of traffic, then I don't think moderators should feel obliged to do anything directly about that - but equally if a moderator wants to take the lead and find some brilliant way to drive more traffic to the site, that should be encouraged.

My personal view is that the issue with Sports is more about the lack of traffic coming to the site than the environment once users are on the site, so honestly I think this isn't something I can do very much about. I'm in no way saying the environment on the site is perfect - it can always be improved - but I don't believe it's currently a major barrier to participation either. I'm always prepared to listen to people who want to tell me (in a constructive fashion!) that I'm wrong though.

  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?

Start gently, and escalate if necessary. My first action would probably be to leave a comment reminding everybody that the world is a nicer place if we're all kind to each other, without calling out the user directly; hopefully they'd get the hint and modify their behaviour. If that didn't work, the next step would probably be comments more direct to the user in an instance when their behaviour is inappropriate.

Only after those options have been tried and shown not to work would it be time to use the powers moderators do have to communicate privately with users about their behaviour, and if necessary suspend them.

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

Communicate. And then communicate some more.

As with question 1, the specific actions I'd take would depend on the exact circumstances - if there were something which appeared to be a misclick or similar by another moderator (for example, undeleting some blatant spam) then I would revert the action and let the other moderator know I've done it. If it's a less obvious case, I'd attempt to talk to the other moderator and explain my point of view and we'd hopefully come to a consensus on the correct action.

The golden rule here is perhaps never to get into an "edit war" - if moderator 1 does X, moderator 2 reverts X but moderator 1 still feels X is the correct action, that's absolutely the point for everyone to put down the tools and talk to each other.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

To borrow from the modern management jargon, moderators are the servant-leaders of the community. That breaks down into two main tasks:

  • Doing the housekeeping to ensure the site runs smoothly, in terms of both content and tone.
  • When necessary, leading the community to any necessary changes by establishing consensus.
  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?

  2. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

Again I'll take these two together; it's a slightly odd sitation for me as a pro-tem moderator as the diamond is already attached to everything I've said so I'll try and answer from the point of view of how things are different here from the other sites in the network in which I have high repuation.

The biggest difference to me is that binding nature of any moderator actions - I can close, delete or do just about anything to a question without any formal consensus from the community. That means that I need to be much more aware of the informal consensus: if there's a question which I think is marginally off-topic on another site, I'd be happy to vote to close it, because it will only be closed if other member of the community agree. When moderator powers are involved, it has to be something where the community has established a strong consensus before I'll take that binding action.

Similarly, I'll try and make sure that anything I write on this site, whether that be a comment, a question or an answer, is of the highest standard, particularly in terms of tone. As a "community representative", it's OK for me to post a factually wrong answer, it's not OK for me to slip from high standards in terms of interactions with the other users of the site. Again, I'm sure I'm not perfect - please call me out if I do slip.

  1. Sports SE has comparatively few users with higher privileges (only 16 users > 5K, only 40 users > 2K, out of ~650 users > 2H and ~12000 users total).
    This can sometimes mean questions aren't closed, answers aren't deleted, or other key site actions that should be managed by the community don't occur.
    Please outline your expectation for taking binding moderator actions in such cases, versus waiting for the community to perform these tasks.

I know I keep saying it, but it depends a lot on the specific circumstances. Blatant spam will get a ton of bricks dropped on it from orbit as soon as I see it. Questions which are unquestionably off-topic will equally get closed on first sight, with a comment explaining the situation to the user if appropriate.

The more difficult cases are of course those where things aren't so clear cut; I'd then take into account a number of factors, including but not limited to:

  • Any votes from the community - e.g. if a question I thought was marginally off-topic had 4 close votes from the community, I wouldn't worry about using my "binding" moderator powers as the 5th vote because that's no different from what a normal user could do.
  • Any (high quality) interactions from the community - if a question which I thought was marginally off-topic has attracted a number of high quality answers, it's probably time to admit I was wrong.
  • How long the question (or pending edit or anything else) has been around - almost the converse of the above; if a question I think is marginally off-topic has been on the site for a year and attracted no answers, or perhaps worse, a number of low quality answers, then that's an indication to me it's not a good fit for the site and should be closed.
  1. There is a high-rep user who is very active on the site, but frequently uses strong language which violates the Code of Conduct in their comments. When you warned them, they replied stating that the questions are of low quality which is why they left those comments. They also threatened to quit the site. Despite the warning, they continue to post similar comments. What steps, if any, will you take in order to address this situation? What if the comments were on Meta instead of main? Does that change your approach at all?

I would attempt to explain to the user the difference between being right and being kind, and remind them that being kind is required by the Code of Conduct, being right is not. In terms of approach, I'd go through the same sort of steps as outlined in my answer to Question 4, although this cases feels like it's already gone beyond the gentle phase and would probably need more direct action. It's almost certainly the the time to talk to my fellow moderators.

The user threatening to quit the site would not influence any actions; while it would be a shame to lose the content the user contributed, it's more important that the site does not have a toxic environment.

Interactions on Meta are a slightly tricky one; I do tend to give very slightly more leniency to interactions on Meta than the main site, because it is often the case that users only post on Meta when they are frustrated about something, and that means they may be slightly less careful about their tone than they would be otherwise. That leniency is only very slight though - direct rudeness is still not acceptable.

| |
6

Nij

  1. Moderators are not selected because they are domain experts in certain tags, but it so happens that you are an expert in one such tag. You see that several members of the community have elected to close a question as a duplicate, but you see that the duplicates don't actually answer the question as stated, nor do they provide a useful signpost for the asker. How do you proceed?

As an expert recognised as such, it should not be controversial to re-open the question. When the difference is sufficiently clear to me, but perhaps not others, that can be explained, either as a comment or in adding a paragraph, and the question re-opened.

However if clarification is needed and the original asker is not available or does not respond, it becomes a case-by-case determination of whether the question is interesting enough to be worth salvaging and/or would allow for high-quality answer that helps others in the future. Without good reason to justify the effort, it is better left closed as duplicate.

  1. In your opinion, what is the biggest problem/challenge Sports Stack Exchange is currently facing? How would you propose to solve it?

  2. Activity on Sports seems to decline as of late; if you were elected, what would you try to do about this? Or do you feel this isn't the job of a ♦ moderator at all?

I answer these together as I believe they are connected.

Our activity has been declining for several months. This is potentially due to the significant reduction in sports worldwide due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the cancellation of major events as a result.

Without fodder, we can't do anything inside the community. As sport begins to resume, I think we will see activity naturally resuming, likely with fresh questions around the interaction of rule changes with the wider societal, legal and political context.

Once sport resumes, we can look to options for promoting Sports SE more widely. I don't personally have much knowledge in that respect, but am happy to support the community in pulling together its efforts.

In short, "wait and see, and help when I can".

  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?

As someone who probably looked like this in the past, I appreciated those who took time to explain exactly why the behaviour was an issue (sometimes more brusquely than I liked).

I believe such a user has the better intentions and should be accorded good faith and a dialogue on how they can avoid entering problematic situations, or avoiding escalation if one develops - learning how to dodge the trap or escape it, so to speak.

However, a pattern of significant breaks from what we as a community consider to be appropriate will end up causing more harm than good. We have to accept that a choice is offered and they will make it of their own accord - the consequence of which may be an official warning or a suspension for a time, or reconnection with the community's expectations.

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

Ask them what they saw in it that I hadn't, or discuss what I did see that they may not have. From there, it becomes much the same situation as for the first question here - explain, decide, act, as a team.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

A phrase that is often repeated on the network, Meta SE in particular, is that moderators are "human exception handlers". Stack Exchange has built up a lot of systemsfor handling most any situation, either automatically or by the direct collective effort of the community.

Moderators deal with the few things that require a holistic consideration of he case at hand; they are the system that maintains balance between the powers and rights of the individual and of the community, and mitigates or solves the problems when they clash.

  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?

I've posted a lot of content here, some of which I wasn't proud of. My attitudes have refined over that time, and while there might be an odd comment that I'd agree should be deleted, I have no issue in being called to explain anything I write on this site.

  1. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

Reaching 10K will take somewhere between 2 and 7 years longer. That's time wasted where I could be using tools with broader scope, saving time and effort for the community and helping

  1. Sports SE has comparatively few users with higher privileges (only 16 users > 5K, only 40 users > 2K, out of ~650 users > 2H and ~12000 users total).
    This can sometimes mean questions aren't closed, answers aren't deleted, or other key site actions that should be managed by the community don't occur.
    Please outline your expectation for taking binding moderator actions in such cases, versus waiting for the community to perform these tasks.

(Disclaimer: I proposed this question for the questionnaire)

I'm often the first vote on a question or answer, whether it's up or down or closure. It frustrates me personally to sometimes see content stick around when it shouldn't, but I don't mind the check that comes from requiring other votes to confirm a decision.

I think that Sports SE has one helpful option available: requesting the reduced limit for closure/reopen votes. I would be happy to make the third out of three votes on posts where I would make the first now, and generally, have no hesitation in voting at any point on a post which is clearly "out of bounds".

  1. There is a high-rep user who is very active on the site, but frequently uses strong language which violates the Code of Conduct in their comments. When you warned them, they replied stating that the questions are of low quality which is why they left those comments. They also threatened to quit the site. Despite the warning, they continue to post similar comments. What steps, if any, will you take in order to address this situation? What if the comments were on Meta instead of main? Does that change your approach at all?

There's an appropriate way to handle low quality content - flag and vote. If an improvement is possible and a comment needed, there's no reason it can't be supportive and helpful, as the entire point of the site.

As with the fourth question, the user can only be presented with information and a choice - breaching the COC can't be tolerated, because of the harm it causes for individuals and for the community. If they decide to stop, excellent. If they decide to leave, not so great, but I wish them well in finding a place they can express themselves more truly. If it requires a suspension, sadly, so be it.

| |
6

dly

  1. Moderators are not selected because they are domain experts in certain tags, but it so happens that you are an expert in one such tag. You see that several members of the community have elected to close a question as a duplicate, but you see that the duplicates don't actually answer the question as stated, nor do they provide a useful signpost for the asker. How do you proceed?

I'd reopen it. Just like a user with a golden tag badge would do. Those users have earned their right by the community's trust and so did mods. When I'm absolutely sure I see no harm in taking direct action, so the question can be answered instead of staying closed for a couple of days and eventually scaring off the asker while it's being discussed on Meta or idling in the reopen queue. A small comment stating my point hopefully helps solving the situation.

  1. In your opinion, what is the biggest problem/challenge Sports Stack Exchange is currently facing? How would you propose to solve it?

Definitely the lack of new questions. We get most of new (and old) questions answered and usually with answers of decent to high quality. There are exceptions, but this is not the reason for the low amount of questions we receive. Solving this issue is not easy. Everyone on the internet fights for site traffic and thus making companies selling that traffic very rich. We need good content to get a good google ranking, but to get good content we need a good google ranking. There is no magic formula in the toolbox of a moderator. We as the community need to find a way out of this.

  1. Activity on Sports seems to decline as of late; if you were elected, what would you try to do about this? Or do you feel this isn't the job of a ♦ moderator at all?

The latest numbers show pretty much the impact of the current pandemic, so it's not something we can fix that easily. All major events are paused or abandoned. People just don't have questions about them. Encouraging questions just for the sake of activity is prone to fail as randomly posting new questions will likely have a negative impact on the site's quality.

  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?

That really depends on the kind of flags and what the user is doing wrong. If the user violates the CoC I'd comment or message them to watch their tone and be nice. If that doesn't help I'd remind them again to watch their tongue and as a last resort suspend them temporarily.

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

Talk to them. They'll have a reason for their action. It could have been a mistake or they misinterpreted something. Or maybe I did. Either way, a quick chat will solve this issue.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Mostly stuff high rep users already do, just with elevated rights. Clean up the mess and lead by example.

  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?

Oh, shiny!

I already try to "lead by example" (see #6) and put high effort into my posts. As already mentioned I believe that high rep users should do that already and not just moderators. But yes, it would certainly feel great to have a shiny ♦.

  1. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

I can clear out blatant queue entries more efficiently with my binding votes. Nuking spam and offending posts/comments before they hurt someone else or decay in the queues (it often happens only one or two votes are missing to close/delete something) is definitely something a moderator can do to help the community members running the site.

  1. Sports SE has comparatively few users with higher privileges (only 16 users > 5K, only 40 users > 2K, out of ~650 users > 2H and ~12000 users total).
    This can sometimes mean questions aren't closed, answers aren't deleted, or other key site actions that should be managed by the community don't occur.
    Please outline your expectation for taking binding moderator actions in such cases, versus waiting for the community to perform these tasks.

This pretty much mirrors my answer #8. The community members earned their right to run the site using the queues, flags, etc. by earning their rep. I don't want to take anything away from them. But I feel it is my duty to clean up spam or offensive content before they hurt anybody, regardless of the number of votes in the queues. Also when my vote is the fifth or any other deciding vote I would still cast it. This kind of votes would have the same effect with our without diamond anyway. And finally, when a flagged post is decaying in the queues because of one or two missing votes and it's an obvious one I'd go ahead and cast my binding vote.

  1. There is a high-rep user who is very active on the site, but frequently uses strong language which violates the Code of Conduct in their comments. When you warned them, they replied stating that the questions are of low quality which is why they left those comments. They also threatened to quit the site. Despite the warning, they continue to post similar comments. What steps, if any, will you take in order to address this situation? What if the comments were on Meta instead of main? Does that change your approach at all?

The Code of Conduct is for everyone. High rep users are no exception. I would warn them a second time stating that low quality content is no reason to be aggressive. I'll repeat myself: High rep users should lead by example, because they're the ones new users see first. If that still does not help a temporary suspension is in order. If they want to quit the site, that's their own choice. This also counts for Meta.

| |
4

Joe

Moderators are not selected because they are domain experts in certain tags, but it so happens that you are an expert in one such tag. You see that several members of the community have elected to close a question as a duplicate, but you see that the duplicates don't actually answer the question as stated, nor do they provide a useful signpost for the asker. How do you proceed?

I would reopen the question, assuming that the "several members" didn't also include another domain expert. I believe the default should be "open" for questions where it is unclear if they should be open or closed; closing questions means we forever lose some answers, while an open question that should be closed does less harm (in most cases). I would then also mention in a comment my reasoning, and if there was good argument for closing it again happily do so.

If I believed it to be controversial, I would mention this to the other moderators in a private chat, to see what their thoughts were; but most close-as-dup issues are not truly controversial.

In your opinion, what is the biggest problem/challenge Sports Stack Exchange is currently facing? How would you propose to solve it?

Activity levels as low as this lead to less engagement and worse questions (and answers). I think this is not perfectly solvable, but to the extent we can, we should keep the quality levels high; that way if a question is asked and gets an answer, it gets a good one. I would love to help encourage additional activity, though I won't claim to be an expert on how to do so.

Activity on Sports seems to decline as of late; if you were elected, what would you try to do about this? Or do you feel this isn't the job of a ♦ moderator at all?

Same as above; I don't have any particular ideas right now, beyond maintaining high quality questions and answers, but would support (actively) any ideas others had, to the extent I can. As for being the job of a ♦ moderator; I don't think it is specifically the job of a ♦ moderator, but rather is the job of anyone on the site, but a ♦ moderator should at minimum lead by example, and should assist in any way feasible when someone (♦ or not) has an idea.

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?

If there was an issue with the tone of their answers that generated that stream, and it was up to me to handle after discussion with the other mods, I would bring it up in a private chat with them, mentioning to them that it seemed their tone was a bit aggressive (or whatever). We've had people on this site before with that issue, though, and I don't think it's truly a problem here; they tend to soften over time as they adapt to the tone of the community.

If they continue using an inappropriate tone, then (after discussion with the mod team, and possibly with a CM) I would support suspending them to make it clear that they need to change. Again, I think this is unlikely to be needed - I've not seen this anyway here - but if it came to that, it's the right choice.

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

It's best when moderators speak with one voice. As such, I'd bring this up in a private chat with the other moderators, and mention my reasons. If they disagree, then I'd leave it at that; if I can convince them, then great - we'd reopen it. Nothing here is life or death, after all; on Parenting I've been on both sides of the coin here, and the world didn't end in either case.

In your opinion, what do moderators do?

♦ Moderators on any site are the second line of defense of the quality of the site. The community is the first line; your flags and edits are always going to be the first thing that happens to most posts. ♦ Moderators also serve to settle disputes between community members, and help guide the community towards the goals the community chooses. They don't set policy, but they help enforce it - even if it's not what they personally would choose.

On a less active site, a ♦ Moderator has more to do on the first line, because questions often can't accrue five close votes, three delete votes, etc.; instead, a ♦ Moderator will end up closing it. Reviewing the regular queues is critical on a less active site, as a result, to make sure anything that one community member is concerned about is addressed.

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've always carried myself in a way that I hope reflects positively on myself and anything I'm associated with; I see no reason for this to matter in my case. Not that I mean that everyone likes everything I say, or even how I say it; that's never going to be true of anyone. But I'm comfortable that I've always had good intentions, and if anyone finds something they feel is inappropriate, I'd be happy to either fix it or explain why I feel it's appropriate.

In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

It allows me to instant-close questions and instant-delete questions, for the most part. I'm not particularly active on Sports.SE right now, but I would be more so as a moderator; that was also the case with Parenting, before I was a moderator I checked the site once a week perhaps, while as a moderator it was multiple times per day. Part of the job. So I suppose, the way I'd be more effective would simply be that I'd look at every question!

Sports SE has comparatively few users with higher privileges (only 16 users > 5K, only 40 users > 2K, out of ~650 users > 2H and ~12000 users total). This can sometimes mean questions aren't closed, answers aren't deleted, or other key site actions that should be managed by the community don't occur. Please outline your expectation for taking binding moderator actions in such cases, versus waiting for the community to perform these tasks.

The reason for having ♦ Moderators is, in part, to allow us to cast those binding votes. I would not be shy in doing so; it's a disservice to the community to not use them. I'd be careful in questions that are not clearly off topic/etc., though; as stated above, my preference is to leave things open if they're not doing active harm and they're not clearly off topic (or duplicate or whatnot). Typically on Parenting I hold off on closing maybe-off-topic questions until they have 2 or 3 votes, particularly votes from at least 2 of the more active members; I don't require my vote to be the 5th, though.

Deleting bad answers I'd probably be even more likely to be proactive on, so long as they're clearly bad, and have negative votes from the community (the one exception there being on HNQs, where sometimes bad answers get positive votes from drive-by voting).

There is a high-rep user who is very active on the site, but frequently uses strong language which violates the Code of Conduct in their comments. When you warned them, they replied stating that the questions are of low quality which is why they left those comments. They also threatened to quit the site. Despite the warning, they continue to post similar comments. What steps, if any, will you take in order to address this situation? What if the comments were on Meta instead of main? Does that change your approach at all?

This is definitely something to take to the moderators as a group; but it probably would involve that user being suspended, if they refused to change. High rep or activity does not mean anything in my opinion here; if someone is being a jerk, then they're being a jerk, and we're better off without them if they won't change.

I do think though that usually people will change, given enough prodding. Most people aren't entirely mean-spirited; they either don't understand they're coming across as rude, or they're not tempering their voice for the situation. Both of those can be changed by someone willing to change, and I think most people are - sometimes a short suspension is all it takes to make it clear that it's needed.

| |
1
  1. Moderators are not selected because they are domain experts in certain tags, but it so happens that you are an expert in one such tag. You see that several members of the community have elected to close a question as a duplicate, but you see that the duplicates don't actually answer the question as stated, nor do they provide a useful signpost for the asker. How do you proceed?

If I’m an expert in that tag - I would reopen it, since I would be sure that the other members would be wrong in their decision to close it.

In cases where I’m not an expert I would propose that it should be reopened (with a comment for my arguments to reopen it) and since I believe it would be better for a question to be reopened and then closed again, than not reopened at all. (But I guess it also depend on how the moderator tools works.)

  1. In your opinion, what is the biggest problem/challenge Sports Stack Exchange is currently facing? How would you propose to solve it?

I think it is probably the lack of good questions and keeping up the activity on the site.

Lately there have been too many questions of questionable quality. And if the site should be trustworthy it cannot contain to many “spam”-questions. It should not be “let us get new question to the site at any cost”, but let us try to keep up the good quality of the questions and answers so people know where to go for reliable good facts and interesting questions.

  1. Activity on Sports seems to decline as of late; if you were elected, what would you try to do about this? Or do you feel this isn't the job of a ♦ moderator at all?

I think my job as a moderator mainly would be to keep up the good quality of the content on the site.

  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?

I would probably take this up with my fellow moderators and see what our common action/strategy for this should be, but is this really a problem?

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

I would take a discussion with them in a private chat and most likely we would come to an agreement (if it should be closed/deleted/etc or not).

In case it is unclear if a question should be closed or not, isn’t it better to keep in open? It can always be closed later on…

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderator are:
- keeping the site organized, so that the questions and answers will be of high quality
- helping other users to solve their “problems” on the site
- ensuring that the rules of the site are followed

  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?

I have no problem with that.

My answers have only been on questions I feel really comfortable with and I don’t post a lot of comments. When I do post a comment it is because I have a valid input to the question. I try to think two-three times before doing something.

  1. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

I don’t think I will ever reach that many reps?

  1. Sports SE has comparatively few users with higher privileges (only 16 users > 5K, only 40 users > 2K, out of ~650 users > 2H and ~12000 users total). This can sometimes mean questions aren't closed, answers aren't deleted, or other key site actions that should be managed by the community don't occur. Please outline your expectation for taking binding moderator actions in such cases, versus waiting for the community to perform these tasks.

The tasks that I am sure of - I would not hesitate to deal with. The other tasks I would ask my fellow moderators for advice until I feel comfortable with the tasks.

  1. There is a high-rep user who is very active on the site, but frequently uses strong language which violates the Code of Conduct in their comments. When you warned them, they replied stating that the questions are of low quality which is why they left those comments. They also threatened to quit the site. Despite the warning, they continue to post similar comments. What steps, if any, will you take in order to address this situation? What if the comments were on Meta instead of main? Does that change your approach at all?

I would take a discussion with the other moderator in a private chat and we would together solve this, but is this really a problem?

I think to COC should be followed by everybody, without any exceptions.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .