12

As per the Moderator Pro Tempore blog post, after about a week SE looks for temporary moderators for new sites to help with the development of the community and to act as a liaison between the community and SE.

The recommendations for requirements from that blog post are:

  • Have a reasonably high reputation score to indicate active, consistent participation.
  • 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.

It's also useful that you have the time to spare for the role, as participation is expected (hoped!) to increase once we are into public beta, and you will be expected to be completely unbiased while fulfilling your moderation duties.

Remember that these positions are only for the duration of the beta, at which point the community should be strong enough to handle full elections.

Anyone within the community is welcome to nominate themselves or others, though please make sure you read the blog post in full beforehand.

For examples of what nominations can look like, take a look at this question from the Raspberry Pi Meta which was posted when that site was at the same stage.

Note: No answer will be chosen on this question at any time. After appointment, the question will be closed.

closed as too localized by yannis Jan 29 '13 at 6:35

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • Pro tempore moderators are chosen by SE staff. They should already know how moderation works. – fuxia Dec 9 '12 at 14:56
  • From your own link: "If your meta site does not have a post to nominate Moderators, start one now! Pro Tem appointments will begin about two weeks after the site is created. The more guidance we receive, the more informed our choice" so while yes, the decision is theirs, it doesn't hurt to have nominations and votes from the community as to who they want :) – Graham Wager Dec 9 '12 at 17:59
  • It is just additional background information for other readers, not an answer. – fuxia Dec 9 '12 at 18:03
  • Ahh, okay, sounded as though you thought we shouldn't be doing this :) – Graham Wager Dec 9 '12 at 20:37
  • 1
    @toscho Not necessarily (re: should know how moderation works). :) Prior SE moderation experience doesn't hurt, but it's not strictly required. – Adam Lear Dec 10 '12 at 22:07
  • 2
    Now that we've got some nominations (and since people here are likely to be more than averagely politically savvy) ... when are we going to start seeing some campaign events? Jingles? Attack ads? I want my "Don't blame me, I voted for redacted" button ... – user97 Dec 11 '12 at 7:51
  • We only have 7 nominations, two with negative counts. – UKB Dec 25 '12 at 20:34
18

I'm throwing my straw fedora in the ring.

profile for Yannis Rizos at Politics, Q&A for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for Yannis Rizos at Politics Meta, Q&A about the site for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for Yannis Rizos on Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/35162.png

I've been moderating Programmers, a graduate Stack Exchange site, for about 10 months now, and I'm quite familiar with the tools and should I be appointed, I'd be ready to moderate the site from day one.

That's about it, if you are interested in learning more about me, feel free to ping me in our chat room.

10

profile for Affable Geek at Politics, Q&A for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for Affable Geek at Christianity, Q&A for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more profile for Affable Geek on Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/45534.png

Christianity.SE and Politics.SE are both topics that devolve very quickly into "He said / She Said" chauvinistic mudfights.

That said, at least on C.SE, I've shown that one can have an opinion, but still discuss it critically. I'd like to believe that:

  • my deep knowledge of political theory (I was an econ / public policy double major at William and Mary, plus I worked on Capitol Hill)
  • as well my experience on what probably should be the other most contentious SE (I'm the highest rep guy there)
  • and finally, the fact that I was able to pastor a very, very liberal church, all the while being a secret conservative* *Note: I am not a religious zealot, and I do not seek to convert anyone to my religion. I see it as rules that other people get to impose on me!

shows that I have the skills and ability to add to this site's success.

Way, way back in College (more than half a lifetime ago now!) I was a Voter Registrar in my state. I signed people up to vote, and encouraged them to have their voices heard. Twenty years on, I still care far less about where people fall on any given issue, then whether or not they are actively thinking about it and exercising their voices on the matter.

My theory is moderation is modelled on that idea

  • Close Votes should be used for spam and wildly off-topic things.
  • Even "off-the-wall" questions can be salvaged (I'll get that Reversal badge yet!)
  • Good questions make good answers easier, but even a lesser-informed question can make for a great answer on occassion.

My vision for this site is simple:

It is a place where people come to get facts and not opinions about politics.

It is a place where dispassionate analysis fuels passion about life, government, and thinking about how society can best organize itself.

Early on, I put forward a pretty good definition of what politics is in order to define what's on topic (Politics is the end result of conflicting egos working themselves out over matters of policy - This means analyses of egos, rules, and policy are all on topic.)

And, finally, I believe that moderation is a balance between encouraging people to communicate, all the while keeping them objective and coherent.

  • I would like to hear in your words how you determine if a question is constructive. – SoylentGray Dec 14 '12 at 14:11
  • To me, constructive questions are those which get to the mechanisms of a debate. Constructive questions ask for facts that can be tested. Non-Constructive questions are strictly opinion based. – Affable Geek Dec 14 '12 at 16:11
3

My platform for this site would be to help the community graduate by being respectful, knowledgeable, interesting and fun. There are already many great contributors here, and I would simply love to have the opportunity to help this site!

profile for Sklivvz on Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites
(source: stackexchange.com)

profile for Sklivvz at Politics, Q&A for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for Sklivvz at Politics Meta, Q&A about the site for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes

  1. I really, really like politics, but I don't have any affiliation. I am not right leaning or left leaning... I am very curious about it, and about how the world works from that point of view. I am a rational, scientifically-oriented person and I tend to have strong opinions, weakly held.

    I will bring an open and curious attitude to the site.

  2. I am an elected moderator on Skeptics, so I have valuable experience to help a community build itself from beta to graduation - especially on a subjective topic like politics.

    I can help to keep in check the various pitfalls a subjective site can fall into: arguing, hostility, etc.

  3. I am also a high rep users in the sites where I participate (26k on skeptics, 11k on stackoverflow, 5k on physics).

    While I am a noob now, I do intend to earn a high rep position anyways.

To the community that knows me from Skeptics: this site is different from skeptics, and I will not badger people with requests for references nor I do intend being very hands on like I am on skeptics. Different sites have different needs. It will be up to us to decide what standards we want, and I will stand for them.

0

So I'll chime in too an I would nominate myself too.

My experience

I'm a full blown community organiser, while not that active on other SE sites due mostly to a lack of interest in the topics I do organise local groups and events on a regular basis including moderation of forums and mailing-lists.

I study Information Systems and am strongly in favor of a scientific debate that should not be ruled by who shouts the loudest.

On the meta-side of SE I do tend to lurk as I do see a lot of good proposals which I then upvote but I tend to only interfere if I don't agree on a certain topic.

My intentions

I'm a student with a political background, I have time to spare and I would really like to see politics.SE take off. We need a neutral platform to discuss political issues.

Should I become an appointed moderator pro tempore I would do mostly janitorial work, enforce the rules as per meta and doing what I'm already doing (due to my reputation) like approving suggested edits. I would also be working on tag-synonyms as by decision of the community. Furthermore would I try to enforce a strict neutrality and in cases where there are doubts clarify them on meta.

  • Question: This seems to be your first SE site ever, do you feel you are familiar enough with the culture and basic workings of SE sites to moderate Politics? (if not here's some light reading to get you started ;) – yannis Dec 10 '12 at 10:20
  • @YannisRizos I do so ;) While I only lurked at stackoverflow I fell confident that I internalized most of the tone… – Sven Clement Dec 10 '12 at 18:41
  • 2
    Question: do you think you have a conflict of interest as the leader of a political party? If politics.se becomes a popular resource for information about politics, wouldn't it be in your electoral interest to use your power as a moderator to manipulate the information it contains? I'm not suggesting you would do that, but I do think having a political candidate/representative deciding what's true and false here could damage the site's credibility. – user97 Dec 11 '12 at 7:30
  • 2
    First of all I do think that moderators should not be the sole judge of right and wrong or true and false. This is a job the community does and as such any moderator that would use his/her powers to make political statements should be barred from the role. That said, my political activities are laid open, they are transparent for anyone questioning my actions and I believe this is better than a moderator with an hiddeen agenda to push his ideology ;) – Sven Clement Dec 11 '12 at 9:20
  • @SvenClement - Realize that question here will be very different from questions on SO. SO questions can mostly be answered with a working solution. The questions here will be more subjective and users will come in with the intent of creating problems. I urge you to go take a look at The workplace meta I expect this will be like that in a way because everyone will have an opinion on some topics. And those topics will probably become popular questions. But check out that meta just to see the the types of issues and discussions that happen there – SoylentGray Dec 14 '12 at 4:31
  • @Chad I already did look around there a bit 'coz somebody else already pointed me in the direction ;) But thanks again, I will take a deeper look! – Sven Clement Dec 14 '12 at 10:43
-2

I'd like to nominate gerrit as a temporary moderator.

profile for gerrit at Politics, Q&A for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for gerrit at Politics Meta, Q&A about the site for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for gerrit on Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/935589.png

Rather than some kind of stump speech by proxy, I'll step aside and allow gerrit to edit this post to accept, decline or otherwise comment on the nomination.


Edit by gerrit:

Thanks for the motivation. I will not decline. Please, do ask me questions in the comments-section.

Pros

  • I'm a rational person and therefore quite capable of systematically going through the facts in a heated argument
  • I would like this site to succeed.
  • I'm not extremely eager. Why an advantage? Maybe people who want power are the ones least suitable to get it? If I don't really want power, I might be less likely to abuse it once I have it.

Cons

  • I'm not extremely eager.
  • I have limited time. That probably applies to everybody.
  • I have no experience in being a "diamond moderator".
-7

I'd like to nominate DVK as a temporary moderator.

profile for DVK at Politics, Q&A for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for DVK at Politics Meta, Q&A about the site for people interested in governments, policies, and political processes profile for DVK on Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/41067.png

Rather than some kind of stump speech by proxy, I'll step aside and allow DVK to edit this post to accept, decline or otherwise comment on the nomination.


Cons:

  • I will not decline the nomination, but I urge people to consider voting for someone else. The reason: frankly, independently of whether I possess qualities necessary to make me a good or bad moderator, I will likely not have enough free time to be able to devote a sustained realitime effort to being a moderator.

    In other words, if nobody else is qualified or is willing to be a moderator, I will be willing to, on the theory that a part-time moderator is better than full-time lack of one. But I would rather not take the spot of someone both qualified, willing and able.

  • I'm fairly opinionated, and have an sufficiently asocial personality. Ask anyone on SFF.SE chat :)

Pros:

  • Have been an active participant on SE (3.5 years on StackOverflow)

  • ... with fairly decent experience of community participation as far as editing/reviewing/flagging/voting

  • ... I am pretty familiar with both the philosophy behind Stack Exchange, the general rules, some of the specific main rule and weird arcane stuff.

  • As a user, I'm a great opposer to tyrannical style of moderation. For example, I strongly object to a moderator using a binding close vote unless (1) a Meta consensus is established to close a question; or (2) There already is a clear consensus from flags and existing 3+ close votes; or (3) The question is actively and real-time damaging or malicious and not closing it ASAP is clearly immediately detrimental to the site (SPAM, highly offensive, 100% off-topic, established troll). As such, I hope that as a moderator I will have a light footprint, mostly concentrating on things regular high-rep users are unable to do, or offering ideas/guidance if people ask for it.

  • I would up vote but you need to have time to spend on the site. It seems to me that you do spend a lot of time here, so if you reconsidered that point, you'd get my vote :-) – Sklivvz Jan 7 '13 at 23:11
  • 1
    @Sklivvz - Thank you. I spend the time in irregular bursts with somewhat prolonged absences. IMHO, a good moderator should be able to produce sustained effort, which I know isn't feasible due to IRL constraints for me. – user4012 Jan 9 '13 at 21:16
  • ...As an extra aside, high-rep users have enough tools to be of a reasonable amount of help in moderating tasks, I think, and I intend to be of such help, as I try to be on other sites. – user4012 Jan 9 '13 at 21:18

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