-8

I myself always prioritize candidates with the highest reputation number (like 30k rep). I say to myself, "well, if a user is good enough in asking and/or answering questions and they are very active, then they can be a good moderator too. Because they know how the site works better than low-reputation (like 2k rep) users."

But other candidates also have very good questionnaires and plans.

So which is more important to consider? Reputation or plans/questionnaires?

15
  • 17
    A person with 2k rep might be a much better curator/moderator than someone with 30k rep
    – Tomerikoo
    Oct 27 at 13:01
  • 2
    rep is the most pointless metric in the entire stackexchange system. Oct 27 at 13:01
  • 3
    We can't really answer that. It's something each and every person should think about for themselves. It's personal opinion, that can't really be backed up with facts. (So unfitting as discussion here, it's more like a poll - which if off topic.) Oct 27 at 13:02
  • 6
    I've seen users with rep of 6+ figures who know (almost) absolutely nothing about how the site works (besides posting answers, obviously). I know it's hard to believe, but it's true. So, rep is hardly an indication of anything.
    – 41686d6564
    Oct 27 at 13:04
  • @samcarter_is_at_topanswers.xyz But the site works on scoring and scoring affects the reputation. Oct 27 at 13:04
  • 6
    reputation only hints to you about the amount and usefulness of someone's posts. It doesn't say anything about their moderation skills. Someone might answer any question they encounter, and get highly upvoted but never close a question in their life. How can that someone be a good moderator?
    – Tomerikoo
    Oct 27 at 13:06
  • 3
    Sadly enough, in contrast to what I just said above, reputation actually is the gateway for earning access to moderation privileges and tools... So I would say that a good moderator is someone that been around long enough to understand how the system works, post enough useful posts to gain some reputation that will in turn give access to moderation tools, and then over time master those tools. Someone who is both a useful contributor and a dedicated curator
    – Tomerikoo
    Oct 27 at 13:08
  • 1
    @aminabzz The score of posts is good for sorting them on the page - everything beyond that is not useful. Oct 27 at 13:09
  • 1
    @Tomerikoo I would say dedicated curator is far more important than useful contributor, but that’s just my opinion. Oct 27 at 13:14
  • 2
    @EkadhSingh-ReinstateMonica I totally and completely agree. But as I described, you have to first be a useful contributor to even be able to curate. So a little bit of both is needed
    – Tomerikoo
    Oct 27 at 13:15
  • Does this answer your question? There's an election going on. What's happening and how does it work? - How well they fulfil the requirements of each phase, failing that the badges for 'user moderation' (Reviews, Flags) on the site in question or multiple sites can be an indicator. Previous (successful) experience as a moderator is one indicator, but being an expert in a science (for technical sites) certainly outweighs many things. --- It's more site dependent what the criteria is, than dependent on a particular criteria for all sites.
    – Rob
    Oct 27 at 13:26
  • Rather than counting the 'expenses offset' from each candidate, it's easier to just weigh the brown envelopes and vote with the heaviest:( Oct 27 at 15:56
  • 1
    mental note. Add bricks to bribery envelopes in future
    – Journeyman Geek Mod
    Oct 28 at 1:49
  • @JourneymanGeek I didn't understand Oct 28 at 19:35
  • 1
    It's a joke referring to Martin James' comment. It's a cliche that bribes were given in brown envelopes and if you're weighing them bricks add weight
    – Journeyman Geek Mod
    Oct 28 at 22:56
20

Ideally? The folks who're already showing the qualities of being moderators. "Reputation" and score are not a 'great' metric on their own.

I'd look at per-site meta participation. I'd look at their comments helping guide new users and the work they've done in and around the community. Essentially meta is our vehicle for supporting users, resolving issues, and influencing micro and macro decision making. We're going to deal with small issues (like advice on closed issues), difficult issues (irate users) and big issues (per site policy) and the quality of one's answers and engagement with the community as a regular user ought to inform how one would use these tools as a moderator.

While I've written in depth (or girth) here - quite specifically for a prospective moderator...

I would try to find the person I feel cares for the community the most, and commands respect, not by position, but by their actions.

The sum total of what they have contributed is more important than reputation, or election time activity. Pick the person who you feel is already doing the most good, and can use their additional moderatoral powers as a force multiplier to keep doing that.

0

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