If the moderator workload is so high, then why is there only 3 new moderator positions available? As per http://stackoverflow.com/election?cb=1
Why not 5, 10 or 20?
There are a lot of people with significant rep and dedication to SO, so why not allow for more than 3 new moderators?
There are currently 16 candidates, and its very likely that the majority of them would make good moderators. Lets say 10 of them would make excellent moderators. How much of a difference would 10 new active moderators make to the workload of "an average of over 1,000 flags per day!"?
Of the current nominations there are some very excellent candidates:
- Andrew Barber
- George Stocker
- Brad Larson
And because there are only 3 spots then a lot of extremely deserving well qualified and willing candidates will miss out.
When IMHO many of the above should just be appointed as moderators on the spot for their well known and proven dedication and leave the election for 3 spots to the remaining candidates (who are also deserving of the position).
Edit: Just to be clear the above list is my opinion only and was chosen on the basis of name recognition (those names that I have seen contributing countless times during my 2 years on SO) plus a few more based on rep to bring the list up to 10. I don't claim the list to be in any way accurate, but I do claim that it shows there are far more than 3 deserving candidates.