10

Update August 24, 2016

Welcome Philipp as our newest moderator, after he graciously accepted the nomination. He will stand alongside the existing moderators.


We have a slot open for a Moderator position that we need to fill. Finding folks who are willing to take on these leadership positions is crucial to the continued existence of this site.

We need your help filling one moderator slot. Please nominate folks you would like to see become provisional moderators for this site. Your input will provide valuable insight to help us make our selections. You can read more about the process here: Moderators Pro Tempore.

The Nomination Process:

  • Nominate a user by posting an 'answer' below. Each nomination should be a separate answer. Use the template at the bottom of this post to complete your nomination.
  • Self nominations are encouraged. This is a volunteer activity, so users should not feel obligated to accept these positions. A self-nomination is simply a way to say, "I am very much interested in this, so let my record speak for itself."
  • Tell us about the candidates. Nominations can include links to other activities like Area 51 participation, participation in other sites, or any relevant thoughts/links that may help us make an informed decision.
  • The nominee should indicate their acceptance by editing the answer to say they accept/decline the nomination. Optionally, nominees are encouraged to write a bit about themselves following their acceptance.

    I accept/decline this nomination.

    Hi, I am name/location/fun fact (all optional). I live in <location>, so I am generally active on this site from <time> to <time>. Some other things you may want to know about me are…

Here is what we'll be looking for in a Moderator candidate:

We are looking for members who are deeply engaged in the community's development; members who:

  • Have been consistently active in this site's creation
  • Show an interest in their meta's community-building activities
  • Lead by example, showing patience and respect for their fellow community members in everything they write
  • Exhibit those intangible traits discussed in A Theory of Moderation

Nomination Template

To nominate a candidate, copy and paste the text below as an answer and complete your nomination writeup:

<a href="http://politics.stackexchange.com/users/UserID">
<img src="http://politics.stackexchange.com/users/flair/UserID.png"></a>
<a href="https://politics.meta.stackexchange.com/users/UserID">
<img src="https://politics.meta.stackexchange.com/users/flair/UserID.png"></a>

###Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because …

  • How long do we have to submit/accept/vote on nominations? – Bobson Aug 19 '16 at 21:22
  • 1
    The sooner the better @Bobson, I'd like to get someone in place in the next week or two. – Taryn Aug 19 '16 at 21:24
  • When is the deadline to vote? – nelruk Aug 21 '16 at 3:34
  • @nelruk I'll be vetting candidates this week, so vote soon. – Taryn Aug 21 '16 at 11:56
  • Already did, go @philipp :) – nelruk Aug 21 '16 at 19:18
  • In the event votes are close, please remember that I can't up-vote my own answer. – Drunk Cynic Aug 23 '16 at 18:16
  • @DrunkCynic, this was note a vote. The SE staff just picked unilateraly the person they wanted. They might have taken inspiration from the scores of the posts, but they, themselves applied the rules they wanted. Note that Philipp was abled to upvote himself. In any case the scores weren't that close, so no problem :-) – bilbo_pingouin Aug 25 '16 at 7:13
  • 1
    Congrats Philipp on being a new moderator! :) And if the kind of discussions I mentioned in my post below are of interest, I'd be available to help. We might even consider reviving the Politics Chat! – bilbo_pingouin Aug 25 '16 at 7:13
  • Is there an intent to 'untag' this so it doesn't populate the "hot meta post" any longer? – Drunk Cynic Aug 30 '16 at 20:24
  • @DrunkCynic This is no longer featured but it still fits the "hotness" factor since it's been a recent popular meta post. It will fall off eventually. – Taryn Aug 30 '16 at 20:26
7


(source: stackexchange.com)

Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice due to a consistent demonstration of level headed and balanced approach to controversial concepts, while offering dedicated editorial guidance to questions.

Edit by Philipp:

I accept the nomination. Although I have almost 200k reputation around various stackexchange sites I never had a moderation position on SE before. But I have some experience with moderation on various forum communities.

My personal opinion about how politics.SE should work is that it should be a site for spreading information, not ideology. Questions and answers should always be written from a neutral point of view. Personal opinion should be kept to a minimum. I am not against freedom of speech in general, but I believe that a Q&A site is simply the wrong medium for it.

When you would like to get a wider impression of what kind of mod I would be, here are a few meta-posts I wrote:

Regarding potential conflicts of interest: I am a member of the Pirate Party of Germany.

6


(source: stackexchange.com)

Notes:

I'm daring to nominate myself. Although not a very high reputation or an old user on Politics.SE, I think I can be a good Moderator.

I have been a member of Stack Exchange for 4½ years, mostly active at Linguistics, Politics, and SO.

I've been a member of Politics.SE community for two years. On Main, I've made 48 posts, five of which are 10+ ones. On Meta, I primarily read and learn.

Also, I'm Top #1 reviewer in all 6 review queues; 1,470+ reviews out of 7,700 total, or 19%.


Moderation. My philosophy is primarily based on encouraging the community-driven consensus rather than enforcing the will of a few persons. The Moderator is the last resort when everything else fails. However, I think that the Mods should lead by example, and this activity will require more time than a regular user would spend.
Also, I believe that most of the moderation tools are already available for every SE user.

Politics.SE. By its nature, this site is different to the sister sites in the SE network, because quite often, every user's unique political views are paired with patriotism, direct personal/financial interests, corporate obligations, and other crucial needs. And this is completely different to the communities dedicated to other fields of human activity.
The natural conflict of interests may drive us toward unnecessarily emotional posts, and the margin between acceptable and unacceptable can be only set by the Mods.

I must disclose at this point that I'm a citizen of Ukraine, and my country suffers from a foreign armed invasion. So I do know what "conflict of interests" mean, and how to show patience and respect for everyone on this site. See also an update below for further details.

There are two things I'd like to see improved on Politics.SE:

  1. Encourage the users to use prooflinks in their posts. Here's some philosophy on this matter; I really think that finding links from reputable sources would encourage self-research which, in turn, would drastically improve the quality of both questions and answers.
  2. Unlike other SE sites, I think we lack a warmer welcome, especially to the new users and their first posts. Quite often instead, the very first comments contain critics and refutation. This drives the users away, and this should be fixed, and the moderators must probably take the lead.

As per closing questions, I'm trying to keep balance. From experience, quite often bad questions receive good answers, and learning from good answers is the ultimate reason why I'm here. Hence, in many cases I tend to leave the "so-so" questions alive.
(just checked my own review history for Close-votes, and it indeed looks like 50/50)
On the other hand, I actively use downvoting (300 down while 750 up).

I am not a Moderator on other SE sites, so there would be no time conflict in this regard.


Update in a response to my attitude toward moderation in a relation to the Russo-Ukrainian war.

This concern comes from a premise that an evil Moderator who's invested would abuse their rights to achieve unfair advantage. In a dictatorship, this makes a perfect sense; someone in power totally controls what people below in the hierarchy would do and think. And punish those who do not OBEY. That's how they use their Moderator hats.
And BTW, that's why they invaded my country; they simply want make us think like they do.

Here at SE, Moderators have a totally different role. We have no users hierarchy. The community-driven consensus decides what's good and bad, and it effectively forces the users to post a quality content.
Moderators should act on bad content, regardless of whether they support the ideas within or not.

Being involved makes no harm by itself. It would be strange to ask an American to stay away from the topic of Presidential elections or surrender a Moderator's badge. Having here the experts about the American elections is good for this site, regardless if these users are Dem or Rep.
Me too, involved in the war that broke on the soils on my motherland. I believe that people in the world are not aware about the very fact of invasion, so yes, I continue providing with Q&A about the topic. Hopefully, my posts are quality ones.

No need for the Moderator's diamond to write a quality content or to react to a bad one.

  • To post well-formulated questions and answers;
  • To back their posts with credible references;
  • To cast your votes;
  • To vote for posts, not for users;
  • To comment, criticize, refute, or support other posts;
  • To criticize with the goal of making the posts better, not to enforce their deletion;
  • To be polite, refrain from personal attacks;

Note, all the rules above apply to all users, not only the Moderators. Being involved does not give us right to violate the above rules. Neither the Moderator's hat does.

I sincerely hope that my prior posts are within rules of SE,
so I don't see any valid reason to suspect me in unfairness while wearing the Moderator's hat.


If elected, I feel that I could bring my expertise to help grow the community and make Politics.SE a better place.

And good luck to all the nominees!

  • I will only support bytebuster when he pledges to not touch anything regarding Russia or Ukraine with a ten foot pole, because I have read many statements from him in the past which indicate he is simply too invested in the Russian/Ukraine conflict to be impartial. – Philipp Aug 20 '16 at 10:13
  • 1
    @Philipp, Good point, let me update the answer as the reply seems not to fit in a comment – bytebuster Aug 20 '16 at 18:01
  • 1
    Moderators should act on bad content, regardless of whether they support the ideas within or not. -- Sounds right to me. It's admittedly easier to accidentally act on something borderline (because a mod close vote is definitive by itself), but I'm a believer in the ability for someone to be both invested and able to take a step back and be impartial. – Bobson Aug 21 '16 at 11:25
1


(source: stackexchange.com)

Notes:

I am much newer and have less reputation than the (currently) two other propositions, but I'd dare to nominate myself nonetheless.

I come almost every day to Politics.SE since several months, I am among the top reviewers, regardless of my late start to it. I am familiar with different other sites, being active on several of them.


Due to personal history, I am reasonably familiar with European politics and treaties. With a basic knowledge of the situation in different other countries.

I think a moderator should be fair and just, but strict when the need arises. And due to the very nature of our site, we wouldn't be facing a lack of work.

I have already called for Striving for the highest quality on the site. And if I agree with the answer I received there, I think the moderators should also take up the role of community manager, and try to get people to enforce certain quality standards. A diamond next to the name gives a certain authority.

If chosen, I would like to guide some discussions on how we can improve, as a community, on the points I mentioned in that meta discussion.


Politics is a subject that really interests me, and I like learning about new ways to see the world, and understanding all parties to build myself a reasonably educated opinion. And Politics.SE can be a great place for that.

A note on potential conflict of interests. I'm French living in Germany, and I'm not a member of any political or confessional group.

  • I highly encourage kicking off those discussions, whether or not you get the mod-diamond. Even if the end result is something like "nah, we're good the way we are", it's always better to discuss it and confirm it. – Bobson Aug 22 '16 at 15:58
  • @Bobson, you'll note that the meta discussion I linked to, was written without having a diamond attached to my name. But I do think that such discussions should be lead by moderators. Those are not only there to keep the site clean, but should also engage in managing the community. But they don't have to, and should probably not, be left alone at it. – bilbo_pingouin Aug 23 '16 at 6:58

You must log in to answer this question.

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