In connection with the moderator elections, we will be holding a Q&A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation. Participation is completely voluntary.
The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it here.
Here's how it'll work:
During the nomination phase, (so, until January 27th at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 3:00 pm EST on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post one question per answer.
We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.
This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into at current.
At the end of the phase, the Community Team will select up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election. That said, if I have concerns about any questions in this fashion, I will be sure to point this out in comments before the decision making time.
Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, containing 10 questions in total.
This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&A.
If you have any questions or feedback about this new process, feel free to post as a comment here.
Arqade has a very active chatroom. But sometimes, folks who are able to contribute constructively on the site itself are unable to participate in chat without bringing out the worst in everyone they interact with. How would you remove such a bad chat-apple without driving them away from the site entirely?
Arqade is well known for having one of the most active chat rooms (The Bridge) on the network. There's a large disparity in the current moderation team's chat presence, from nearly daily to very seldom, for varying reasons.
Do you feel it's important for a moderator to have a presence in The Bridge, in addition to the main site and Meta? Why or why not?
Assume a civil but controversial discussion is occurring over whether or not a class of question is on-topic. Questions of that type are being closed, reopened, closed again, etc but there's no clear community consensus on what we want to do. What, if anything, do you do about this as a mod?
A new user has arrived and doesn't really understand the way the Stack Exchange system is supposed to work. They're complaining that people keep editing their posts and a roll back war has started on a question that they've asked. You need to step in and moderate the situation. What actions do you take?
Being a moderator is a customer service/public relations job for which there is little to no extrinsic motivation. You will invest hours of your free time dealing with the worst the internet has to offer, and we expect you to do it with a patient demeanor and a smile.
What is your motivation for candidacy, or in short - why do you want this job?
Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8).
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?
How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
In your opinion, what do moderators do?
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?
In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
Being a moderator means you are the hand that acts out the will of the community. Often this requires you to take action that you disagree with. In some situations, you may earnestly believe that the will of the community is wrong, but you have a duty to carry it out. Frequently, you may encounter users who are angry with you personally for taking an action that you don't agree with, but which is required of you.
How have or will you deal with the situation where you've been asked to be comfortable with doing something that makes you uncomfortable?
We get quite a few new users who don't initially understand how this site works. Suppose a new user asks a question here that is getting down votes and close votes. The question has already received some comments explaining how the question could be fixed (but for the sake of argument, no personal attacks), but the user either doesn't understand or isn't listening, and seems to be getting increasingly agitated by the criticism their question is receiving. What, if anything, would you do in this situation?
The powers of the moderator (above and beyond high rep users) are access to tools that will allow you to take immediate, decisive action against posts and users.
However, often you will be asked to move slowly or take no action, even though you may earnestly believe that there is immediate action warranted. You may witness behavior you find actively hostile towards the community and be told that nothing needs to be done.
How will you show restraint when given power, the desire to use it, but been told that doing so would constitute abuse of that power?
A new user has joined the site and posted a question which is obviously off topic, you know the question needs closing - how do you approach this with the user? (Provide past examples if you've got any)
While the moderator position you're nominating yourself for is a voluntary position, there is a minimum amount of time that you would need to be available in order to be an effective moderator. How much time do you currently spend using Arqade and are there any known circumstances in which this will change in the future?
Will you use your moderator powers to correct/overturn previous diamond moderator decisions, to enact community consensus?
As an example, and let's say that this was back when the questions were asked: If you were a mod then, what would you do regarding the questions mentioned in this meta post: BioShock Infinite closures on release day
The two currently top-voted answers are against the closing of the questions, yet the questions have remained closed and deleted.
A user from another Stack Exchange site has been causing trouble in The Bridge. The user got suspended from chat by a moderator from Arqade but was then subsequently unbanned by a moderator from the site they normally use. You feel that the ban was completely justified. What do you do?
A user requests feedback on why their question was downvoted, stating that this was to improve their question. Currently, as a non-moderator, how do you handle these comments and users? And more importantly, once a moderator, how will you handle these comments and users?
Is this fine? Or will you give the user a stern "talking to" or engage in hounding the user? Flag/Delete their comment? Downvote without leaving a comment, just to "teach that user a lesson" about the anonymity of downvotes?