Skip to main content

2018 Moderator Election

nomination began
Mar 5, 2018 at 20:00
election began
Mar 12, 2018 at 20:00
election ended
Mar 20, 2018 at 20:00

On Stack Exchange, we believe the core moderators should come from the community, and be elected by the community itself through popular vote. We hold regular elections to determine who these community moderators will be.

Community moderators are accorded the highest level of privilege on our community, and should themselves be exemplars of positive behavior and leaders within the community.

Our general criteria for moderators is as follows:

  • patient and fair
  • leads by example
  • shows respect for their fellow community members in their actions and words
  • open to some light but firm moderation to keep the community on track and resolve (hopefully) uncommon disputes and exceptions

Every election has three phases:

  1. Nomination
  2. Primary
  3. Election

Please participate in the moderator elections by voting, and perhaps even by nominating yourself to be a community moderator!

I would like to nominate myself for the moderator elections, and my reasons for nomination is as follows. These reasons, of course, cannot be proven objectively. However, I will try to be credible as possible.

  • I am highly enthusiastic about this duty. Academia.SE is the start page of my browser, and I am checking fornt page posts regularly.

  • I consider myself as an unbiased and objective person. Before I commit an action such as close vote, or make a comment on the post, I do not check the poster's reputation in Academia.SE, country, or status. I do not "take sides" in any matter.

  • I never develop a grudge against a particular user. Even if they were very rude or belittling, these will have zero effect on my future reactions. I am aware that every user in this site is an individual and it is very natural for them to have bad, grumpy days.

  • I am also a human as well as the rest of the users in this site. Therefore, I also make mistakes even though I try to minimize them. Having that said, I am very open for you to point out my mistakes, and I am happy to correct them.

  • I try to edit and reopen as many questions as I can.

I wish the best to all cadidates!

I would like to nominate myself for the open moderator position. I've been a long-time user of this site since the beta phase, and I've been happy to see if grow. I'd like to see it continue to grow and mature, and I'd like to have a hand in that process.

There are certainly mechanical tasks associated with moderation, and I've tried to contribute to those as a high-rep user as much as I can, and would certainly do more-so as a moderator. But beyond that, I think there's an aspect of improving the community through moderation - raising the signal-to-noise ration, helping improve questions and answers that are on the cusp, etc.

I think the moderation team has done an excellent job with those tasks thus far, but I think there's still work to be done - especially with how we handle influxes of users from Hot Network Questions, how we approach questions asking us to read the mind of someone's advisor/editor/etc. I'd like to believe my participation in the site to date suggests I'd be a good fit for that, but that's for you all to decide :)

Good luck to all those nominated.

My answers to the election questions:

I've enjoyed being an Academia user for about 3 years now, and I hope I've been of some help (something which does not necessarily correlate with the accumulated reputation). I've participated to meta discussions about on-topic-ness, and about the operation and the management of this site. I'd be happy to contribute as a moderator.

If there is a thread in my participation here, it would be about the variations of academia around the world. I think that the possibility of presenting, discussing and spreading information about this variability, allowing people to better understand different academic cultures, is one of the strengths of this community, and it's something that enriches all of us – long-standing and casual users alike.

Academia is growing and we frequently have questions that reach the HNQ list, causing moderation issues, especially in the most controversial cases. This site is characterized by a soft, unobtrusive moderation style, but fairly efficient nonetheless. I think that whoever is elected should continue along this path and, in case, I'll do my best to follow it.

My answers to the election questions:

I am Wrzlprmft and I would like to be your moderator.

I am enthusiastic about this site and its community and consider it an important resource in the confusing and diverse academic world. My main activity on the site is community moderation, and I believe that I have contributed to improving the site via meta contributions in the last years. Being a moderator would allow me to donate my energy and experience to those important tasks that require special powers and the trust of the community. Moreover, the authority of the mandate allows me to steer community discussions to enact changes to the site, scope, and community if needed.

Through being active on Meta SE and several other sites, I am familiar with the mechanics of Stack Exchange and have sources from which to draw inspirations to address problems. Moreover I am already a moderator on two other sites, which makes me familiar with moderator tools and what to expect from the job. Note that I do not think that my existing moderatorships strongly affected my community moderation on Academia, so I expect the same to apply to diamond moderation.

This election is over.