Timeline for Revising the criteria for moderator nominees
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2022 at 13:42 | history | bounty ended | gnat | ||
| Aug 23, 2022 at 16:15 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | @JourneymanGeek "I'd respect someone waiting for that period to run out," maybe on SO and SuperUser elections are held more frequently but on the sites where I participate sometimes there can be a gap as long as six years between elections. | |
| Aug 23, 2022 at 15:41 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | I think the answer focuses a little too much on the suspension rule, I am generally more concerned under-qualified nominees running for elections but I do like your proposal: Review queue participation, vote count, flag count, show them.|| You think suspensions are important? Well, show them, and let the voters decide. | |
| Aug 23, 2022 at 15:35 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A Слава Україні | I'd suggest editing this answer, focusing on the impossibility of former moderators to nominate themselves because of the blanket ban (regardless of where they were suspended and the length of the suspension) and posting it as an answer here. | |
| Aug 22, 2022 at 23:02 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | that show they're ready, and would hope they get elected for who they have been in the period, not for how they had messed up before. | |
| Aug 22, 2022 at 23:02 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | " Had you not linked your accounts, it would not count. So a suspension is a reason to cut you out from democratic process" - suspensions are for people, not accounts. If memory serves (and I'm not naming names), there was a case of someone not eligible creating a sock, winning an election and being removed. If you were suspended, hid it and got elected, you'd be dishonest and if caught removed. I've known formerly suspended mods come out of it, and serve with passion and dedication. I'd respect someone waiting for that period to run out, being a great user and displaying the attributes | |
| Aug 22, 2022 at 22:58 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | Its not a 'great' argument but SE's traditionally struggled to keep up to date with elections - having a moderator for life (-) kinda saves on the paperwork. And I've informally ran an election for something and... it was exhausting. I also feel like as a moderator, my focus has been more on the flag queues and the 'ground' than the review queues. I don't think I'm statistically that much greater than 10 years ago, but I've hopefully learnt the 'soft' skills of being a moderator better. If you plonked me down on a new site where I didn't know the subject well, I'd still manage. | |
| Aug 21, 2022 at 13:40 | comment | added | user1271772 | I agree with you that appointments should not be permanent. Having to be re-elected every 5 years, for example, would be better. This is what happens if you suggest having non-permanent mods. In addition to the 36 downvotes there, I got 11 more downvotes here and these were my first two questions on Meta.SE. | |
| Aug 21, 2022 at 9:33 | history | edited | Martin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor typos
|
| Aug 21, 2022 at 8:53 | history | edited | nvoigt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 396 characters in body
|
| Aug 21, 2022 at 8:46 | history | answered | nvoigt | CC BY-SA 4.0 |