What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

With nominations now being sought for the 2012 Moderator Election, I'm struggling to see for how long such appointments are made: without knowing that, how can any nominees commit to being available?

share|improve this question
2  
They're appointed for life! If the mod has had enough they can step down or take a break, and replacements (usually runners-up) will be appointed as necessary. (Posted as comment because I'm sure this is a dupe, but I haven't found it yet.) –  Jeremy Banks Jun 5 '12 at 13:29
    
See: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/984/… –  Al E. Jun 5 '12 at 13:31
    
Thank you both - especially for that citation, @AlEverett. I will vote this as a dupe myself. :) –  eggyal Jun 5 '12 at 13:33
1  
Note sure why this is a duplicate, the question it is a "dupe" of is a discussion about whether or not moderators should have terms. This question asks what those terms are. They are two distinct things. –  casperOne Jun 5 '12 at 14:21
    
@casperOne: You're right, but from my perspective that discussion gave me the understanding I sought - should I rephrase the question? –  eggyal Jun 5 '12 at 14:58
    
@eggyal Typically, edits to rephrase the question are fine if they a) don't have any answers, or b) don't change the context of the existing answers. If you can do that, then the edits are fine. My point was, this question should stand on it's own, it's not a dupe. –  casperOne Jun 5 '12 at 15:03

1 Answer 1

up vote 10 down vote accepted

The appointments last until one of the parties decides that it's no longer feasible to maintain the relationship.

It should be safe to assume that moderators will continue to be moderators until:

  • They violate the terms and conditions of the site, or the moderator agreement in some shape, way, or form that doesn't allow for recompense
  • They fail to meet the standard of duty (as ambiguous as it is now)
  • They choose to not be a moderator anymore and ask to have their diamond removed
  • Death

Make no mistake, if you're nominating yourself for a moderator position on Stack Overflow, you should expect to actively work on moderating Stack Overflow. If you aren't willing to do that, make way for someone who will.

share|improve this answer
2  
Yes, well, we say that U.S. Supreme Court Justices are appointed "for life" but they also retire and, rarely, get impeached. Same deal. –  Al E. Jun 5 '12 at 13:41
    
Thank you casper; I'm not nominating myself - I don't even meet the minimum criteria (and I fear that a rather tongue-in-cheek moment of impatience that resulted in a warning would in any event disqualify or count strongly against me). I was just curious what commitment was expected from nominees. –  eggyal Jun 5 '12 at 13:41
4  
@eggyal To be honest, most nominees have no clue about the magnitude or the subtlety required for what they're in for. It really is like going to a place you can never come back from. –  casperOne Jun 5 '12 at 13:46
    
@AlEverett Removed the removed for life, as you are right about life tenure. –  casperOne Jun 5 '12 at 13:49
    
That last paragraph needs to go places. –  BoltClock's a Unicorn Jun 5 '12 at 13:56

You must log in to answer this question.

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