26
$\begingroup$

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 one of 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. Tim's answers
  2. Gung's answers
  3. Aksakal's answers
  4. Amoeba's answers

  1. Several tag-related tasks require moderator attention. How well do you feel our community deals with them presently? Would you be able & willing to improve the situation (if it is needed)? How? Related links regarding tag burnination 1 2, tag synonym implementation 1, and tag synonym merging 1

  2. What do you see as the biggest problem facing our site and what would you do to help address it?

  3. Do you have any Meta posts that you're particularly proud of, or that you feel best demonstrate your moderation style?

  4. One of the issues which crops up frequently on this site is the dividing line between a statistical question and a computing question. At the moment custom and practice is that requests for code or package suggestions are seen as off-topic. Do you think we have the boundary in the right place? If you do not what is your suggestion for the new boundary?

  5. 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?

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

  7. There is some controversy surrounding our use of Community Wiki status, see What is and what should be our policy on making questions community wiki?. Our current policy is not sufficiently clear, is not being consistently implemented, and is arguably suboptimal (though opinions might differ). What is your opinion on all that? Do you see any of that as a problem? What is your preferred policy? Would you be willing to work towards formulation of some consensus policy and enforcing its consistent implementation?

  8. What do you propose to do about the host of unanswered questions?

  9. Do we close questions (for any reason) too much, or too little? Why?

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

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I cannot find the following information: we learn that "two moderator positions are available". Are they two additional positions? If not, who will stand down? $\endgroup$ – Alecos Papadopoulos Aug 14 '17 at 18:46
  • $\begingroup$ @AlecosPapadopoulos These are two additional positions. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Aug 14 '17 at 19:50
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ There were several comments on the nomination posts at stats.stackexchange.com/election which now seem to have been edited away. First, discussion of candidates' views and qualifications surely remains pertinent during the election. Second, if those comments were subject to removal, then minimally there should have been a warning about that (apologies if I missed it). Ideally those comments should remain accessible! $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Aug 22 '17 at 10:04
  • $\begingroup$ @NickCox are the comments present here: stats.stackexchange.com/election/4?tab=nomination ? $\endgroup$ – julian Aug 26 '17 at 18:54
  • $\begingroup$ Yes indeed; thanks! $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Aug 27 '17 at 6:51
  • $\begingroup$ @NickCox You are welcome. Thank you for challenging certain claims being made. The resulting discourse was informative. $\endgroup$ – julian Aug 27 '17 at 15:33
32
$\begingroup$

Gung (my nomination post)

  1. Several tag-related tasks require moderator attention. How well do you feel our community deals with them presently? Would you be able & willing to improve the situation (if it is needed)? How? Related links regarding tag burnination 1 2, tag synonym implementation 1, and tag synonym merging 1

In my opinion, tags are one of the principle ways information is organized on the site. Since building a permanent repository of high-quality statistical information is our mission here, that makes tags vital. Improving the management of our tagging system (e.g., merging or eliminating tags) is one of the primary areas where we can enhance the site. If elected, I will give this more attention than it's gotten.

  1. What do you see as the biggest problem facing our site and what would you do to help address it?

The biggest problem facing the site is probably that we are getting an increasing number of questions without getting an increasing number of answerers. To some extent this is unsolvable, but consider that a large proportion of the new questions seem to be lower quality (off topic, unclear, etc.). For example, the close vote review queue is clogged with dozens of threads per day. Many of these are unambiguous, and can be closed immediately (a smaller number seem unambiguously able to be left open). I would guess that as many as 2/3 could be addressed immediately, presumably making it easier for the community to focus its attention on the remaining cases where judgment needs to be brought to bear. A related issue is that we should probably be marking more questions as duplicates. I've noticed that some users have been working on that, and I could assist with the process.

  1. Do you have any Meta posts that you're particularly proud of, or that you feel best demonstrate your moderation style?

(This is cheating somewhat, because it is actually @Silverfish's post, but) I've contributed a lot to How best to use the review queue?, and I think it will illustrate my potential moderating style to voters. Another germane meta.CV thread might be: How should questions be answered on Cross Validated?, in that it expresses a vision of how I think the site should function.

  1. One of the issues which crops up frequently on this site is the dividing line between a statistical question and a computing question. At the moment custom and practice is that requests for code or package suggestions are seen as off-topic. Do you think we have the boundary in the right place? If you do not what is your suggestion for the new boundary?

I think the line is largely in the right place, but that it may be ambiguous in practice to determine which side of the line a given question is on. In general, I think the criterion is straightforward: what does the OP need explained? If the required information is statistical in nature (or about machine learning, data mining, or data visualization), then the question should be considered on topic here, even if it is asked in terms of some software. If what is needed is about implementation in some software, it should be considered off topic here. The potential source of ambiguity is that a user of one software may not be able to recognize the statistical content that exists in a question that is asked in terms of different software. I don't see any perfect solution to that problem. Lastly, I think that if a question has multiple aspects, some of which are about code, and some of which are statistical, it can remain open so that the latter can be addressed. It may be helpful to leave a comment informing the OP that they may not get answers to the former aspects.

  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?

This would be a difficult situation; it would need to be addressed with patience and professionalism. First, it is always important to recognize that it is easy to misconstrue comments or actions on the internet, because we don't have access to any of the paralanguage / non-verbal cues that we normally use to interpret statements when face to face. Thus, the principle of charity should be applied. I do think the existing moderator team has done a good job, so I could discuss the situation with senior moderators and defer to their judgment when necessary.

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

It seems to me there are two different types of situations. If another moderator has acted unilaterally, I can find a private way to discuss the issue with them to see if a resolution could be found. At the other extreme, if the moderator had been the fifth close vote, there is nothing special about the moderator status with respect to the vote. That would be the same as any other case where the community had made a decision using the mechanisms that exist for the community to manage the site. I believe moderators should be cautious about reversing community actions, although they can if it seems appropriate. This is mostly a judgment call, but it could also be discussed on meta.CV.

  1. There is some controversy surrounding our use of Community Wiki status, see What is and what should be our policy on making questions community wiki?. Our current policy is not sufficiently clear, is not being consistently implemented, and is arguably suboptimal (though opinions might differ). What is your opinion on all that? Do you see any of that as a problem? What is your preferred policy? Would you be willing to work towards formulation of some consensus policy and enforcing its consistent implementation?

It seems to me this has been discussed, and the nature of the situation has not changed. In sum, the SE system has fairly strict criteria for the kind of questions that can be asked here. Questions that don't meet those criteria are supposed to be closed and deleted (even if they are popular old threads with many answers and upvotes—such threads have been deleted on SO). Our use of CW constitutes a kind of fudge that attempts to save those threads we believe have a lot of value. The options are to continue this policy, or to close and delete all such threads. My personal preference is to maintain the status quo. On the other hand, inconsistent implementation is clearly suboptimal. When I notice a thread that should be either made CW or deleted, I could make it CW, and could do that when someone else notices such a thread and flags it.

  1. What do you propose to do about the host of unanswered questions?

(N.b., this is largely another take on #2 above.) I'm hardly going to be able to answer them all myself, and I have little ability to recruit large numbers of new members to the site to answer them, so to a first approximation, there isn't anything I can do. However, part of the problem is that there are a large number of unclear, low-quality questions that aren't well answerable, which contributes to the problem. Those could be closed.

  1. Do we close questions (for any reason) too much, or too little? Why?

There was a period not too long ago, when I thought we were getting a little too quick on the draw (cf., Are we closing questions too fast?). Certainly, there will always be cases where I disagree with other's judgments one way or the other, but I think the balance is somewhat better now.

  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'm already past 20k rep.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I like your answers. You taught me that questions on coding or errors in coding should only be referred to SO if they contain a reproducible example. Regarding question 10 maybe you can tell us why you value becoming a moderator more than just enhancing your reputation. $\endgroup$ – Michael R. Chernick Aug 13 '17 at 20:24
  • $\begingroup$ I'm somewhat mixed about becoming a moderator. I have little interest in enhancing my reputation; I have more reputation than I need already. $\endgroup$ – gung - Reinstate Monica Aug 14 '17 at 1:11
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I hope you will feel better about it after you are elected. $\endgroup$ – Michael R. Chernick Aug 14 '17 at 16:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ FWIW, I endorse amoeba & Tim for moderator. $\endgroup$ – gung - Reinstate Monica Aug 18 '17 at 20:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think all the nominated candidates are worthy. I would pick you as being the most qualified based on your reputation and the way you participate on the site (questions, answers, editing and reviewing). $\endgroup$ – Michael R. Chernick Aug 18 '17 at 21:41
23
$\begingroup$

@amoeba (my nomination post)

Disclaimer: please do read my nomination post linked above; I am not a perfect candidate and I list some important reservations there.

  1. Several tag-related tasks require moderator attention. How well do you feel our community deals with them presently? Would you be able & willing to improve the situation (if it is needed)? How? Related links regarding tag burnination 1 2, tag synonym implementation 1, and tag synonym merging 1

Disclaimer: this was my own question.

I consider tag management an important part of the moderator job, which has been a little neglected until now. If I become a mod, this is one issue where I am planning to make a difference. Apart from simply paying attention to the upcoming tag issues, I would like to work out some guiding principles/policies of tag moderation. In particular I hope we will be able (through discussions on Meta) to decide on how we are merging tag synonyms, how we are burninating bad tags, etc., and then I can use the diamond powers to implement these decisions.

  1. What do you see as the biggest problem facing our site and what would you do to help address it?

The biggest problem is probably a large amount of poor questions that are not really answerable but are not closed either. A partial solution would be to close more, but we don't want to close hastily whereas often such questions are long and intricate and require substantial effort to triage. I am not sure much can be done about it. And frankly, I doubt I will be able to make a difference here.

  1. Do you have any Meta posts that you're particularly proud of, or that you feel best demonstrate your moderation style?

I have been relatively active on Meta. Not sure if there is anything to be "proud of", but a cursory glance through the list of most upvoted posts should show what kind of meta-topics I have been interested in. Many are about tag-related issues.

  1. One of the issues which crops up frequently on this site is the dividing line between a statistical question and a computing question. At the moment custom and practice is that requests for code or package suggestions are seen as off-topic. Do you think we have the boundary in the right place? If you do not what is your suggestion for the new boundary?

I believe that the boundary is in about the right place, at least in theory: if the question needs statistical expertise to answer then it is on-topic. In practice I sometimes see threads closed (or left open) inappropriately, but I guess some mistakes, as well as some grey zone, are inevitable. Several recent Meta threads when on-topic Qs were either closed or migrated away to SO come to mind; we have usually been able to resolve such cases.

  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 I have no experience in disciplinary measures on this forum, I would discuss such a case with other mods. My impression is that such cases are quite rare.

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

Ping that mod and discuss it with them.

  1. There is some controversy surrounding our use of Community Wiki status, see What is and what should be our policy on making questions community wiki?. Our current policy is not sufficiently clear, is not being consistently implemented, and is arguably suboptimal (though opinions might differ). What is your opinion on all that? Do you see any of that as a problem? What is your preferred policy? Would you be willing to work towards formulation of some consensus policy and enforcing its consistent implementation?

Disclaimer: that was my own question. Also, the linked Meta question was mine.

I have been annoyed by our use of CW and, personally, I might prefer to approach it differently, but it is not my intention to push against the consensus. What I would perhaps like to do as a mod, is to get back to that Meta discussion and try to extract/formulate/discuss some consensus view. I'd like it to be written down, and then I can try to make sure that it's implemented (more) consistently.

  1. What do you propose to do about the host of unanswered questions?

See above. I don't think I will be able to do much about it.

  1. Do we close questions (for any reason) too much, or too little? Why?

See above. I think on average about right.

  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 already am above 20k. Some tasks, e.g. tag-related tasks, require diamond powers.


I endorse @gung who is IMHO an ideal mod candidate and should be everybody's first choice. I will be happy if @Tim wins the second place; as I said elsewhere he is much more active in both answering and moderation than I currently am. If they win, I will pester them with all the tag issues :) Both of them demonstrated their interest in moderating tags.

$\endgroup$
19
$\begingroup$

Tim (my nomination post)

  1. Several tag-related tasks require moderator attention. How well do you feel our community deals with them presently? Would you be able & willing to improve the situation (if it is needed)? How? Related links regarding tag burnination 1 2, tag synonym implementation 1, and tag synonym merging 1

I agree, that they require. I think that we are not dealing well with them at the present moment. In my opinion, the problem is that you have to have a reasonably high reputation gained for answering the question for some tag to be able to vote for its changes. In many cases moderators intervention is needed if we do not want the process to last forever.

  1. What do you see as the biggest problem facing our site and what would you do to help address it?

The biggest problem is the growing number of unanswered questions, or questions with low-quality answers. Unfortunately, this is not the kind of thing that moderator can help. We need more people who would answer the questions and provide high-quality answers, we need to encourage people to answer the questions (e.g. by providing bounties as Glen_b did!).

  1. Do you have any Meta posts that you're particularly proud of, or that you feel best demonstrate your moderation style?

I don't believe so. I often visit Meta and I participated in multiple discussions on Meta, but it is always about solving or discussing some practical problems.

  1. One of the issues which crops up frequently on this site is the dividing line between a statistical question and a computing question. At the moment custom and practice is that requests for code or package suggestions are seen as off-topic. Do you think we have the boundary in the right place? If you do not what is your suggestion for the new boundary?

This is not a black-and-white issue, there is no clear-cut boundary and never will be. I believe that there were multiple "coding" questions that could be answered as well on CV (e.g. asking about implementing some statistical method), but the boundary is always blurry. For me, the boundary is that if coding question requires the statistical expertise to answer, then it is on-topic.

  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?

It depends... In general, I'd encourage him to stop the inappropriate behavior by comments and by deleting the inappropriate comments by him. If it doesn't help and the behavior is really disruptive, then I guess you need to use more direct moderation steps (penalties). High reputation should not give you immunity, rather the opposite, it should encourage you to serve as an example for others.

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

Unless this is an obvious error, I'll bring the issue on Meta to seek guidance from the community.

  1. There is some controversy surrounding our use of Community Wiki status, see What is and what should be our policy on making questions community wiki?. Our current policy is not sufficiently clear, is not being consistently implemented, and is arguably suboptimal (though opinions might differ). What is your opinion on all that? Do you see any of that as a problem? What is your preferred policy? Would you be willing to work towards formulation of some consensus policy and enforcing its consistent implementation?

Honestly, I don't think this is an issue and don't have any strong opinions on comunity wikis. I feel that they make sense just for the threads like the one with statistical jokes, where upvotes, or downvotes are used just to promote the "favorite" answer. I don't think that in other cases they are really necessary and have no problem with people getting +1's for things like writing few sentences on their favorite book on some topic the the "what is the best book on..." kind of questions.

  1. What do you propose to do about the host of unanswered questions?

I don't think moderator can do anything about it. I guess we could close more off-topic questions, but on another hand, I feel that sometimes we close too many questions. I believe that the core of this problem is that we have very small number of users who answer the questions. Our answerers are also pretty specialized and, I guess, we lack the answerers who specialize with some topics, e.g. machine learning (as compared to statistics).

  1. Do we close questions (for any reason) too much, or too little? Why?

(This is a question that I proposed.) In my opinion both. We close lots of questions that are slightly unclear, while many of them could be answered. I personally often answer the slightly unclear questions and in many cases I learn that my answer was helpful for the OP. On another hand, anyone can notice (e.g. when using search [that in many cases is unusable]) that we have a huge number of low-quality and off-topic threads. On yet another hand, I guess that putting questions on hold potentially discourages people from using this site instead of providing them with answers, so maybe we should try to be more empathetic?

  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 already reached 37k and I believe that the major problem is that in many cases our voting system is inefficient. For example, to approve changes in tags we need votes from users with high reputation for those tags and sometimes it is hard to bring such issues to their attention. Moderators can solve simple problems quicker then community. But honestly, if you look at the privileges moderators have, they do not really posses any superpowers.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I would appreciate a fuller response to Q1 (about tags), in particular to the part asking about what (specifically!) you are going to do about it as a mod. You say that the mod intervention if often needed, but could you briefly outline how you imagine doing if you become a mod? E.g. somebody posts a tag burnination request on Meta; what do you do? What about all the unmerged tag synonyms that we have? Etc. What kind of personal mod policy are you envisioning? $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Aug 8 '17 at 18:44
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Re Q9, and tangentially some others, would you intend to intervene more in the review queues to correct some of the decisions you feel are being made wrongly? It seems fair to say you aren't especially active in reviews at the moment (343 reviews at time of writing) - though clearly that is because you devote much useful energy to the site in other ways! - and some mods prefer to let the review queue run itself unless it suffers a backlog. On the other hand, a decisive mod vote would allow you to be "effective" there. $\endgroup$ – Silverfish Aug 8 '17 at 23:05
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Silverfish I probably won't be able to find much more time on moderation-like activities, then I have spend until now. So I'd rather "let it run itself". I also think that going through all the queue and reading multiple questions so to decide on open/close would inevitably lead to routine and making low-quality decisions, so to bad moderation decisions. $\endgroup$ – Tim Aug 9 '17 at 8:29
  • $\begingroup$ @amoeba there is lots of things going on CV every day, I believe moderators have a lot of work to do. There is a lot of things to be done with different stuff, including tags. I believe that those things were not yet dealt by the mods until now because they didn't have enough time for it. I don't want to promise you that I'll fix something and then not keep my promise. You know from our discussions on Meta that I'm interested in cleaning up the tags, but I can't promises you what exactly I'll be able to do given other duties and limited time. $\endgroup$ – Tim Aug 9 '17 at 8:35
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ @amoeba BTW, maybe you want to nominate yourself? Even if you wanted to focus solely on the tags, it'd make a difference and you'd get my vote. $\endgroup$ – Tim Aug 9 '17 at 8:54
  • $\begingroup$ Re promises - that's fair enough and I understand; I actually did not mean that you should promise anything, I was asking about your vision of how mod policy should work in this case (something like "After a burnination request is posted, as a general policy I'd suggest we wait X time until Y votes, check if conditions Z apply, and then contact SE admins to burninate" or something like that). But whatever, we can discuss it after you become a mod :-) Regarding nominating myself, see here about my concerns. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Aug 9 '17 at 9:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Re duties and limited time, it would actually be very interesting to know what average time per day or week our existing mods spend on moderation tasks. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Aug 9 '17 at 9:04
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @amoeba but sometimes less then Y people would care about the tag, then what? Yes, those are the kind of things you need to discuss, but sometimes you need a mod so that he can make an arbitrary decision when it is needed. For this kind of stuff you'd rather need to understand the general principles of how this site works, rather then policies in bullets... $\endgroup$ – Tim Aug 9 '17 at 9:12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Just noticed that your comment asking me to nominate myself got 10 upvotes... Currently there are 2 nominees, you and gung, but AFAIK we need at least 3 for the election to take place. I am considering to nominate myself, but if I do this will mean that you and me will essentially be competing with each other, given that gung's chances I would estimate as around 100% (which is absolutely deserved)... This is awkward given that you expressed your interest from the beginning while I have been rather hesitant. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Aug 14 '17 at 12:08
  • $\begingroup$ @amoeba at worst, we would have two good mods :) Moreover, you can always withdraw from the competition if some other candidate appears and you would still hesitate. BTW, please notice that you have 7h to do so (unless the nomination phase gets extended). $\endgroup$ – Tim Aug 14 '17 at 12:12
  • $\begingroup$ #9. In my opinion, 'unclear' questions and 'low-quality' are almost 'brothers'. We don't need more of those. If OPs can't fit the site by taking advantage of all material available (tour, help center, close reason messages, CV meta posts tagged with faq), then, perhaps it is not their place here; because SE wants mainly to build a high quality repository about statistics, etc (and if possible, to directly help OPs, but directly helping OPs can be mutually exclusive helping the community, if good answers are buried under a pile of unclear, broad, off-topic, duplicate questions) $\endgroup$ – Andre Silva Aug 18 '17 at 17:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So, I disagree we close too much unclear questions, and that we should try to be (even) more empathetic. $\endgroup$ – Andre Silva Aug 18 '17 at 17:53
0
$\begingroup$

Aksakal answers your questions

  1. Several tag-related tasks require moderator attention. How well do you feel our community deals with them presently? Would you be able & willing to improve the situation (if it is needed)? How? Related links regarding tag burnination 1 2, tag synonym implementation 1, and tag synonym merging 1

Frankly, I don't use tags because in my opinion they're the remnants of the old way to search for information. GMail's slogan used to be "search don't sort," and tags belong to "sort" approach. We have the search engines and that's how people find the answers and end up asking questions on SE. Nobody's using tags anymore, so I wouldn't sweat about all tag issues, they're irrelevant for the utility of CV.

  1. What do you see as the biggest problem facing our site and what would you do to help address it?

After people ask all basic questions and get all the answers, the questions become more and more narrow specialized, then fewer and fewer people would be able to answer them. The generalists (dudes with high reputations) will not be able to answer anything and become bored and leave, the questioners don't get answers, the site traffic goes down and it dies.

We need to find a way to attract the specialists to answer specialized questions. Maybe have incentives to do so by throwing in "house bounties" on very interesting questions from narrow fields.

  1. Do you have any Meta posts that you're particularly proud of, or that you feel best demonstrate your moderation style?

Not really

  1. One of the issues which crops up frequently on this site is the dividing line between a statistical question and a computing question. At the moment custom and practice is that requests for code or package suggestions are seen as off-topic. Do you think we have the boundary in the right place? If you do not what is your suggestion for the new boundary?

Yes, the current approach is right. No need to change. If someone's asking for SAS code to do a certain thing, they should go to SAS forum.

  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?

Warn him at first, then ban if behavior doesn't change.

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

Contact that mod, discuss. Usually reasonable people come to the same conclusion when given a chance to discuss.

  1. There is some controversy surrounding our use of Community Wiki status, see What is and what should be our policy on making questions community wiki?. Our current policy is not sufficiently clear, is not being consistently implemented, and is arguably suboptimal (though opinions might differ). What is your opinion on all that? Do you see any of that as a problem? What is your preferred policy? Would you be willing to work towards formulation of some consensus policy and enforcing its consistent implementation?

I don't have an opinion. I don't think these things are important for CV to be a valuable source of information. It's like a side business, and doesn't impact the bottom line

  1. What do you propose to do about the host of unanswered questions?

Regularly review them, and bump them up from time to time or close/merge. There's no other way about it, someone has to look at them and process them one by one.

  1. Do we close questions (for any reason) too much, or too little? Why?

Just right

  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?

Moderation is an orthogonal dimension to answering questions. It's about keeping and order and making the market so to speak. I don't see this as an alternative to answering questions at all.

$\endgroup$
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ I have a feeling that Q10 is really asking about what difference the mod tools would make, compared to the mod-like tools that you get at 10k - and to some extent 20k - rather than about the difference between moderating activity and participating in the Q&A. (The question would in some ways make more sense for a candidate with <20k rep, but I suppose it can still be interpreted as asking what incremental difference the new tools would make for you.) $\endgroup$ – Silverfish Aug 16 '17 at 21:59
  • 18
    $\begingroup$ I am sorry but the statement "Nobody's using tags anymore" is wrong. We know for a fact they are still used. People edit them, delete and assign them to question, even complain about them at times. Re-tagging of questions regularly comes up in the review queues. Speaking from personal experience: I use them quite a bit to make my favourite topics stand out. (Just to be clear, I am not your downvoter; your answer is clearly relevant for this electoral matter.) $\endgroup$ – usεr11852 says Reinstate Monic Aug 17 '17 at 23:33
  • $\begingroup$ @usεr11852, it was more of a position statement than a statement of fact. I don't think tags are useful, and as a moderator the only tag that I'd support is "self-study", this one's utility $\endgroup$ – Aksakal Aug 18 '17 at 2:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Silverfish, ok, I got it. So far it seems the ability to close the questions is really the one that would make a difference for me in terms of the routine usage $\endgroup$ – Aksakal Aug 18 '17 at 2:20

You must log in to answer this question.

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