18

In connection with the moderator elections, we are creating 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 two of our back-up questions for a total of 9 questions. We skipped one backup question because it covers similar ground as the submitted questions.

As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, listing each of the questions, with your answer to each question given just below. 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. What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?

  2. 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?

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

  4. As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?

  5. A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?

  6. What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?

  7. What is your field of study in academics?

  8. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

  9. 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?

13
  1. What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?

I've tried to participate to the life of this site by highlighting unclear points in questions, by suggesting duplicates, by proposing to close off-topic questions or reopen possibly on-topic ones, and by protecting questions when necessary. I'm an active participant of our Meta, and I can be found in the Ivory Tower chat for informal discussions.

I vote a lot because I think that voting is an important aspect of the Stack Exchange communities. And even though it is a kind of Lepreuchan money, which disappears in real life, it helps encouraging writing good questions and answers, and it can be attracting to new users.

I admit that I don't use too much the review queues because I frequently access this site from my mobile phone. Thus, most of my moderation activity (close/reopen/delete votes) is done from the front page. I'm aware that if I would be elected, I'll quite probably have to change this aspect of my participation.

  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 wouldn't deal alone: I'm convinced that problematic cases like this one should be discussed among all the moderators. I'd first propose to have a private chat with the user to convince them to avoid this kind of disruptive behaviour. I'd consider suspension as a last resort.

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

I think that for borderline cases we should leave the decision to the community. Therefore, I wouldn't reopen or undelete the question unilaterally, but I'd propose to the other moderator to agree on publishing a meta question to see what the community thinks about the closure/deletion/etc.

  1. As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?

Comments are really a tricky point for at least two reasons. First, there is a clear discrepancy between the intended usage of comments from the Stack Exchange staff and the intended usage from many users. Second, it appears that moderators have limited tools to deal with comments. For instance, at present, comments can be moved to chat only once (there are suggestions to improve these tools, but we don't know if and when they will be implemented).

In principle, I think that comments should be deleted only when they are rude or offensive, or when they become obsolete. A long list of comments can be moved to chat, but I'd avoid deletion. However, for answers, I think that comments that point out significant technical, regulatory or legal flaws should stay attached to the answers and not moved to chat or deleted. Of course, this principles might not be fully applicable because of the limitations of the moderation tools.

  1. A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?

I'd reopen or undelete the post, and then I'd open on Meta a broader discussion to see up to which point we can really extend the borders of on-topicness around that example, to achieve a wider agreement.

  1. What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?

This one:

https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2027/20058

Even though at first glance it might not seem directly related to moderation, I choose this answer because I think it exemplifies well my understanding of people's way of voting, and the way in which complains about up or downvotes should be handled.

  1. What is your field of study in academics?

I'm a metrologists, and metrology is likely the most underrepresented field in any kind of community, especially that of grammar-checkers. Along my life, I've actually worked in several different subfields of metrology: first that of fundamental constants, then that of time and frequency metrology and now that of electrical metrology, mostly resistance and impedance metrology.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

I think that they do two essential activities. They clean up the mess and they actively gauge the community about critical topics, to better guide the direction of the site.

  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?

Certainly, a bit ashamed of a few things I had written, but conscious that I'm working to avoid making such mistakes again.

  • 2
    Re: question 1, you also raise flags! Over 300 helpful flags - you are already a big help to the moderators in terms of bringing things to moderator attention when the circumstances warrant it. – ff524 Mar 8 '18 at 2:40
  • @ff524 Oops, thanks for reminding me about that! :-) – Massimo Ortolano Mar 8 '18 at 7:43
  • Did I only notice encouraging of plagiarism by this candidate? answer number 6 when you click on link, he brag about most upvoted comment, @ff524 ? How this is acceptable? in that comment is clearly stated that plagiarism is not big problem. – SSimon Mar 19 '18 at 3:27
  • 1
    @SSimon No, I don't encourage plagiarism, and the comment has nothing to do with plagiarism. The linked meta question and my remark associated to the comment link provide more context. – Massimo Ortolano Mar 19 '18 at 4:23
  • 2
    @SSimon, perhaps there is an issue here with language comprehension? Massimo says, at the end of the answer you link to, "That said, as my most voted comment highlights, sometimes I'm puzzled too." When one reads the comment, it is clear that Massimo is not sympathising with plagiarism. – Yemon Choi Mar 19 '18 at 5:19
  • 2
    @SSimon In fact, once again you have confused ideas about what the word plagiarism means, perhaps due to language issues. Plagiarism is not the same as piracy; plagiarism is about failure to cite, not where one acquires sources that one cites. Perhaps you should spend more time trying to read carefully what people have written, rather than leaving "OMG how bad" comments based on knee-jerk reactions – Yemon Choi Mar 19 '18 at 5:21
  • 1
    @SSimon If you want to read an answer of mine which well represents my position on plagiarism you can have a look at this one: academia.stackexchange.com/a/79219/20058 – Massimo Ortolano Mar 19 '18 at 6:12
  • @YemonChoi do you have any evidence that plagiarised or copyright infringed source is academically and ethically acceptable? – SSimon Mar 19 '18 at 10:14
  • that is even worst link @MassimoOrtolano this is one of comment on it by other users "Plagiarism specifically has to be stolen, or taken, or pilfered, and claimed as your own" – SSimon Mar 19 '18 at 10:18
  • 2
    @SSimon Are you blaming Massimo for something someone else said to mark disagreement with him? – Arnaud D. Mar 20 '18 at 8:58
  • @ArnaudD. no I am blaming him for incapability to communicate with users of this website. I am not sure how he will moderate. – SSimon Mar 20 '18 at 10:37
  • @SSimon You ask "do you have any evidence that plagiarised or copyright infringed source is academically and ethically acceptable?" Please indicate where you think I have ever claimed this, or retract your implication that I condone these things. – Yemon Choi Mar 21 '18 at 0:46
  • 1
    @SSimon I have merely pointed out that you accused Massimo of condoning or encouraging plagiarism, and that the comment you seem to be referring to has nothing to do with plagiarism. You refuse to acknowledge this and now start talking about copyright infringement, which is distinct: see ask.lib.byu.edu/a.php?qid=230251 – Yemon Choi Mar 21 '18 at 0:47
  • 1
    @Ssimon More generally: you continue, after two years on this site, to accuse people of things based on careless readings or hasty first impressions of what they wrote, and then you refuse to acknowledge your errors or back up your claims with specific quotes. – Yemon Choi Mar 21 '18 at 0:53
  • @YemonChoi are you a lawyer to Massimo? I am not only 2 years on this website, your stalking was unsuccessful. How is copyright distinct from the pirate version of the book? I am amazed that every user has his own impression about this important issue ( both legally and ethically ) – SSimon Mar 21 '18 at 4:48
12

Wrzlrpmft’s answers

  1. What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?

I performed a lot of community moderation such as reviewing, raising flags, and editing. During this, I always aspired to do more than what is necessary, but salvaged posts that would likely have been closed otherwise, left comments that helped users understand and address problems, or identified problematic patterns, e.g., vote abuse. Moreover, I contributed to addressing issues with site on Meta by adjusting our scope, providing guidance for new users, and similar. Being a moderator on two other sites, I am familiar with the tools and capabilities, and I know what to expect from the job.

  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?

The contributions of a single member cannot be so valuable that they justify tolerating a disruptive behaviour. Thus, I will start with a moderator message (without suspension) explaining why their behaviour is problematic. Should this not work, I will resort to more drastic actions such as suspension. During all of this, I will take into account what the exact problem is: It’s a considerable difference if somebody is rude or just likes to discuss a lot.

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

I’ll talk to the moderator to find out where exactly we disagree, if at all. Should this not resolve the situation, I will consult a third moderator or the community on meta, depending on the situation.

  1. As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?

I will not hesitate to delete comments that are rude or have become obsolete due to edits, answers, or similar. I will also generously move comment discussions to chat that have digressed from the actual post, since this does not destroy any content but keeps the main site focussed. As for the more tricky cases like answers posted as comments and single chatty comments, I will decide on a per-case basis, but usually act only upon flags as they indicate that some other user sees a problem (barring the occasional flag abuse).

Should I feel that general deviations from this policy are necessary, e.g., due to an epidemic of answers in comments, I will bring the issue to Meta. I also may use my authority for general reminders on hot network questions (e.g., “please do not post answers in comments, they will be deleted without warning”) and act accordingly.

  1. A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?

If the Meta discussion yielded a clear consensus for undoing my action and convinced me of it, I will act accordingly. Otherwise, I will leave the decision to another moderator, as I cannot avoid being biased. Should this not be possible (e.g., if time is of the essence) or when being the other moderator in such a situation, I would consider the arguments and votes on Meta, whether the decision can actually be undone without causing additional problems, and potential third ways.

  1. What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?

Obviously insincere posts – how should users/reviewers react?.

When I posted this, Academia was being haunted by malicious posts by tenacious trolls as described in the question. Since this was a new problem for Academia, many users were unaware of the general issue and did not know how to delete such posts efficiently without a moderator. Therefore these posts caused some bad blood (and thus success for the troll) before moderators would even see them. I am quite confident that my post helped to break this vicious cycle.

I chose this post for several reasons:

  • I took a quick and effective initiative when needed.
  • It employs and encourages community moderation.
  • It reflects parts of my general approach to problem users: Avoid public dispute, in particular if this what they appear to be seeking, and use existing mechanisms to get rid of problematic content.
  1. What is your field of study in academics?

I am a physicist by education, but due to the interdisciplinarity of my research, I have ventured into mathematics, medicine, neuroscience, biology, and computer science. I am aware that academia varies more than I think it does. Thus I will be very careful before making moderation decisions based on what I believe to know about academia’s workings – but then I do not expect this to happen very often.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderators mainly handle issues that cannot be handled by community moderation due to privacy, extremeness, or time pressure. They also act as a liaison between the community and Stack Exchange. Finally, they can steer community discussions, which happens mostly through the authority of the mandate and the tag.

  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 am fine with that. Should I be elected, I do not intend to change how I speak except that I sometimes will speak explicitly as a moderator. The only possible exception for this is that I have a knack for asking questions where my intentions are misinterpreted and will try even more to avoid this.

  • I think your answers to questions 2, 3, and 5 are close to perfect and reflect your experience from being a moderator on other SE sites. – StrongBad Mar 8 '18 at 13:34
  • Which would best reflect your time commitments: Would you split the time currently spent as a moderator on other sites to include Academia, or would you add more time to include Academia? – aeismail Mar 8 '18 at 20:17
  • @aeismail: I would add more time to include Academia, which in turn comes from the time I spend on community moderation and similar now (so it doesn’t come out of nowhere). – Wrzlprmft Mar 8 '18 at 20:57
  • Seems like you're relatively active on SE.Academia, so if you're able to satisfy your commitments to the other two SE's you mod, presumably you'll be able to satisfy a commitment here, too. That said, I'm mostly just curious - do you find having multiple mod duties to be much of a time sink? – Nat Mar 9 '18 at 13:20
  • @Nat: Well, SE is a time sink, but it is also my hobby. I actually like (community) moderation most of the time. So far, my moderatorships never were much of an additional time sink but rather a shift of activities within a time sink. – Wrzlprmft Mar 9 '18 at 21:24
  • @Wrzlprmft do you have an example for the very last point in your questionnaire, about "asking questions where [your] intentions [were] misinterpreted"? Did you think of advocatus-diaboli discussions or ironic statements? Just to clarify. Thanks and best luck for the election! :) – nabla Mar 12 '18 at 6:33
  • @nabla: 1, 2 (and some questions on other sites). In both cases, things were read between the lines that I know not to be there (which doesn’t mean that I am not to blame for these things being read into my posts) that resulted in accusations against me. – Wrzlprmft Mar 12 '18 at 6:41
  • ah, I see. Well, if anything, I consider it another bonus point for you that you experienced this happening as a user, and drew the right conclusions for future posts, maybe then as a mod. – nabla Mar 12 '18 at 6:52
  • Why Wrzlprmft is not disqualified due to providing a false statement in nomination? Is academic dishonesty not applicable for moderators? – SSimon Mar 13 '18 at 5:14
  • 8
    @SSimon: I ask you once more: Can you please tell me where you see a false statement and evidence why it is false? And please quote/link specific messages, not an entire chatlog. – Wrzlprmft Mar 13 '18 at 6:19
  • 5
    @SSimon For the last time, please state which part of @Wrzlprmft!'s nomination you regard as a "false claim". If you cannot identify precisely what you mean, then once again you should stop creating noise. – Yemon Choi Mar 15 '18 at 4:38
  • 4
    @SSimon You are presumably a postgraduate student yourself; surely you would recognize that in your own studies or research one should justify one's claims and take an accurate approach to what one says – Yemon Choi Mar 15 '18 at 4:39
  • 1
    @SSimon Have to say that the discussion in the election chatroom seems to provide further evidence of the candidates' fitness. This election seems to have the happy problem of there being many fine choices. – Nat Mar 18 '18 at 19:11
  • 3
    @SSimon if there is anyone here who is damaging their reputation, it is not Wrzlprmft or Fomite or Massimo ... – Yemon Choi Mar 19 '18 at 5:25
  • 3
    @SSimon as I have attempted to explain to you (but you refuse to listen, as usual) Massimo was not supporting intellectual theft. Moreover, in the other comment thread, you said he was supporting plagiarism, and when I corrected your use of the word plagiarism you chose to ignore me. It is high time you realise that one reason users are disagreeing with your claims about individuals, is that those individuals did not say the things you think they said. If you cannot parse people's statements it might be wiser not to comment so much and so vehemently. – Yemon Choi Mar 21 '18 at 0:29
9

Fomite's Answers

What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator?

There are three main activities I try to engage in as a regular user of the site that I think translate well to being a good moderator:

  • When possible, I try add comments that might encourage a question/answer to be more fleshed out. I think one of the first goals of moderation should be to render a question/answer suitable to the site before approaching the idea of removing it.
  • I try to make room for the idea that there are alternate opinions, different field-specific norms, etc. I think balancing "Academia is not homogenous" with the population of the site and the desire for general questions is one of the inherent challenges of Academia.SE
  • I make time to go through the review queues when visiting the site. Though I confess the new GUI indicator for this threw me for a loop for awhile.

How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?

I've earned a number of "moderation-esq" badges, and use the review tools to try contribute to the overall moderation workload as much as possible. Additionally, I try to use the flagging system fairly actively so the moderation team doesn't necessarily need to be combing through everything, and have what I'd like to think is a decent "Helpful" rate of 86%.

Beyond that, as mentioned in the answer above, I do my best to try and help users - especially new users - craft an answer that's suitable to the site, even if it takes a few iterations.

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 think the first order of business with a user like that is to try to engage with them to figure out where those flags are coming from. Is there a particularly hot button issue that provokes those reactions, or is it a more widespread problem?

That might help craft a solution - either the user just knowing this about themselves, perhaps engaging in a little self-moderation, etc.

Past that, I think one needs to figure out if this is merely creating more work for the moderators, or actively driving down the environment of the site. It's possible that heated discussions might not result in hurt feelings, users leaving the site, or otherwise productive comment chains being dragged down. On the other hand, it's entirely possible that, even if they are valuable contributors to the site, that their "style" is sufficiently detrimental to Academia.Se that some sort of more formal sanction needs to be considered.

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

I think there's a difference between "I wouldn't have done that" and "This is a hill I'm willing to die on" in terms of disagreeing with another mod. Generally, I've found the moderation team on Academia.SE to be excellent, so if anything for most disagreements I might try to gauge why they thought it should be closed/deleted/etc. to understand their reasoning, learn from their experience, etc.

For things where there's a genuine disagreement and I think the closing/deleting was a mistake rather than merely something I wouldn't have done, I think engaging with the other mod to understand why, and then helping the user of the question change things to address their issues is how I would approach it. But when it comes down to it, I think that a moderator - who is by definition a very committed member of the site - deciding something should be closed is a pretty reliable proxy for there being at least a reasonable argument that it should be.

As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?

I think the most important considerations for comments is that SE answers are supposed to be useful beyond solving the OP's original problem. I think comments that address things that have sense been resolved by edits, etc. are prime candidates to be cleaned up, because their context is now missing.

I also think rude and abusive comments fall under the category of not adding much - I think they're more likely to drag a conversation down than they are to improve the content of a question or answer. I'll admit, looking at what I've flagged vs. what's been accepted in that camp that I might have a wider definition than some of our current moderators.

On the other hand, I don't think moderately long comment chains, as long as their being productive, need to be removed.

A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?

Try to take the answers opposing my decision to heart, reflect on them, and improve my moderation in the future.

For things that are genuinely split, I tend to err on the side of pruning over not pruning, especially for the latter category. A lot of votes on either side (for Meta definitions of a lot of votes) suggests that while this needs to be reflected on more, there's no inherent call to change my original decision.

On the other hand, if one of the opposing answers genuinely makes me rethink my logic (this has happened to me more than once), I'm perfectly happy to do what I can to reverse the decision, and avoid it coming up again.

What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?

This is, for the record, a very good question.

I'm particularly proud of this question: Time to Expressly Ban "I want to do X, Here's My Life Story..." questions? which did start us down the road to a custom close reason.

I think this is my best example because I found myself at least growing somewhat impatient with the volume of "Lets talk about my specific edge case" questions that weren't answerable without being on the admissions committee of University X, and editor at Journal Y, etc.

Declaring those unanswerable and genuinely out of scope was, I think, a good thing. I also don't think it had the downstream consequences of closing some otherwise worthwhile question that people were worried about.

We still get some of these questions, usually answerable with a comment "Have you asked your advisor?", but I think it helped the signal-to-noise ratio of the site.

What is your field of study in academics?

I'm a computational epidemiologist. I make virtual people sick for a living.

Importantly, this also means I have a fair amount of exposure to both computational science and biomedical science. I think having diversity of fields in both users and moderators is useful because there are often answers on this site that are very field specific (see: anything involving LaTeX or arXiv).

Having a broad range of voices is, in my mind, a good thing.

In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderators gonna moderate.

There are, naturally, the administrative aspects of moderation. The "Super-Close", being able to migrate questions, etc. - but as noted, users above a certain reputation have many of those same tools. I think there's also an aspect of moderation that comes in the form of trying to be a guiding/calming influence on improving questions and answers, modeling behavior, etc. And in that aspect, I think the difference between a moderator and a user is one of obligation - it's non-optional for a mod.

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?

While I post under a pseudonym, that pseudonym is pretty weak, and I try not to say anything I wouldn't be comfortable saying with my name attached to it. The same is true of the moderator diamond.

Somewhat related to this, from IIRC the CrossValidated election questions awhile ago, is the idea that a diamond might make one's behavior change. While I expect that, if elected, the volume of my moderating-type tasks will increase, I already treat things like voting to close a question as if they're the final say.

2

Padawan's answers

Question 1

What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?

My comments on the ways to improve a question is usually received well. I have 203 comments, and a big portion of them is for other users' posts. Either for the purpose of improving the question or clarifying the answer. I am trying to edit and reopen as many questions as I can. Also, I am trying to omit unrelated details in long questions to make them more readible. I never hesitate to flag a discouraging comment, regardless to the total votes of the post.

Question 2

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?

"Valuable" here is subjective. I cannot judge the value of an answer. I can only decide if it goes against some community rules, or not. Therefore, I would carefully examine every flag and comment, whether they are legit or not. If the user indeed posted an answer that is strictly agains community rules, then there is no option but banning the user.

Question 3

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

If I feel that question does not deserve to be deleted, I first edit the question, and reopen. If it is deleted once more based on the flags, I then have no option to leave it closed.

Question 4

As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?

Other than the clearly stated rules, these are the conditions for me to delete a comment is as follows.
a) The comment is just posted for upvotes, containing a pun or a joke that is slightly related to the question.
b) The comment is taking the micro-discussion to a totally different topic.
c) The user is ranting about the post because of some previous venom.
d) The user is discriminating another user because of their ethnicity/status/policital view.

Question 5

A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?

As far as I have observed, the votes in Academia.SE are pretty reasonable. However, in some rare cases, people go with their own ideas instead of being objective about the matter. In these cases, I would first state the reason why I decided to delete the particular post, and ask for a clear contradiction in the rules. If one states a clear contradiction, also approved by majority, I would discuss undeleting the post with other moderators. Unless it is an argument like "this is a major nowadays" or "if this happened to you," I would undelete the post.

Question 6

What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?

This is the one. Yes, this post of mine has -5 votes. However, I lay out my justifications to close a question clearly, one by one. Also, you can see that I am not judging a question by the OP, and I am eveluating the question by its last state because I have not voted for closing the question again.

Question 7

What is your field of study in academics?

Computer science and mathematics. Specifically, computational geometry.

Question 8

In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderators make this site a better, more readible and joust-free environment. They act to resolve the issues which do not add any value to the content of this site. Usually, there is an obvious solution according to most of the users.

Question 9

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?

That is a big privilege for me. However, the things I write, or comment to hall not carry more weight than any other user. I humbly accept that I have a great responsibility, but I do not consider myself as a "god" like The Trainman in Matrix Revolutions.

As a side note I would suggest adding the options "Technical question about Google Scholar" and "This is a rant rather than a question" for the reasons of closing a question, as those are two of most common closing reasons.

  • 1
    Regarding your answer to question 3: Why do you ignore the other moderator’s decision and not seek clarification before acting? – Wrzlprmft Mar 20 '18 at 9:34
  • Regarding your side note: If you feel that way, why do you not ask a separate meta question? That being said, in the last three months, we had only a handful of questions closed with a reason mentioning Google Scholar or rants explicitly, whereas we had more than hundred closures for each of the existing custom close reasons (source for 10 k users). I do not see a strong cause for replacing one of the latter. – Wrzlprmft Mar 20 '18 at 9:41
  • @Wrzlprmft The same question might be asked to the moderator who closed the question in the first place: why did you ignore the other motertors' opinion and closed the question by yourself? The ideal way, of course, is to have a discussion about the action. – padawan Mar 20 '18 at 11:18
  • why did you ignore the other motertors' opinion and closed the question by yourself? – In the scenario in question, the other moderator didn’t ignore your opinion but just wasn’t aware of it. – Wrzlprmft Mar 20 '18 at 12:10
  • @Wrzlprmft So, I am not aware of that moderator's opinion on the edited version of the question. Maybe they will find it OK to be left open. – padawan Mar 20 '18 at 13:12

You must log in to answer this question.

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