9
$\begingroup$

Update: This post is now closed since the temporary moderators have been selected. Please see this announcement for details.

Important: if you're nominated and accept the nomination, please add the word 'accept' somewhere in the answer, and also mention which timezones you are likely to be able to handle.

Based on the web-apps template, we should be choosing candidates to be our site moderators.

  • Each nomination should be a separate answer. Link the name to the user's profile so we can see their activity.
  • The nominee should indicate their acceptance by editing the answer, adding that they accept the nomination. Optionally they can write something about their self. This can be just practical stuff like which hours and how many hours they expect to spend on the site, but also some motivation.
  • From the top voted nominees a number of temporary moderators will be appointed, until the site is out of beta and real elections can be held.

Some guidelines:

  1. Must be a currently registered user in good standing
  2. Must have a reasonably high reputation score to indicate active, consistent participation.
  3. Should exhibit patience and fairness at all times in their questions, answers, and comments.
  4. Should lead by example, showing respect for their fellow community members in everything they write.
  5. They should want the responsibility. Nominating users isn’t the same as an obligation. It’s purely voluntary!

When nominating, please put the name of the nominee as a heading (with a #) and as a link to their real profile. Also add a link to their meta profile. (See the already provided answers). After that, please keep them empty for the nominees to add information themselves.

Besides voting, everybody could off course also point out in the comments why that nominee is a good candidate to be moderator or not.

Read more about the moderator nomination process here.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ two things to note: the moderator need not be a domain expert - in fact for this temporary moderator position, it's definitely not necessary. Secondly, it's quite important to have moderators that spread across different time zones. $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 23, 2010 at 18:28
  • $\begingroup$ @Suresh: made this a wiki, so feel free to edit. We need to also answer the other "essential questions" (to the extent that this hasn't been done yet): blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/07/…. $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Aug 23, 2010 at 18:30
  • $\begingroup$ Another note. Robert Caitano will probably assign temporary moderators sometime this week: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/62625/… $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 29, 2010 at 20:38
  • $\begingroup$ We need more acceptances. See meta.cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/192/… $\endgroup$
    – Charles Stewart
    Commented Aug 30, 2010 at 12:56
  • $\begingroup$ No we don't: three would be fine, sorry! $\endgroup$
    – Charles Stewart
    Commented Aug 30, 2010 at 17:24
  • $\begingroup$ @Suresh: You should actually close or lock this question, at this point... $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Sep 3, 2010 at 17:45

13 Answers 13

Reset to default
16
$\begingroup$

Suresh Venkat

(meta)

Accept. My preferred time zone is 2200-0100 MT (GMT 0400-0700)

$\endgroup$
12
$\begingroup$

Shane

meta

extra bonus: is a moderator on Stats.SE and knows the ropes.

Edit: Accept: I can cover the America/New_York time zone.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ @Shane has done more than anyone to advance the discussion of the site proper. I don't think there are better candidates at present. $\endgroup$
    – Charles Stewart
    Commented Aug 25, 2010 at 13:58
  • $\begingroup$ @Charles: Thanks. If others continue to feel the same way then I will accept for the interim period, although I would rather see people from within the field taking leadership. $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Aug 25, 2010 at 14:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Shane; can you roll back your withdrawal ? $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 25, 2010 at 21:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Suresh: Done, but I will continue to promote the idea of having someone with more domain knowledge take my place in the long run, as I can't be as effective (e.g. at marketing, etc.). I also don't know how Robert Cartaino will feel about having someone moderate more than 1 site, so we'll see how he reacts. $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Aug 25, 2010 at 21:54
  • $\begingroup$ you mean working hours in the east coast ? $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 26, 2010 at 5:19
  • $\begingroup$ That's right; I usually am active in the evenings as well (and sometimes the middle of the night thanks to my 3 month old...). $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Aug 26, 2010 at 12:38
12
$\begingroup$

David Eppstein

(meta)

Accept

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Accept, given Shane's response to Ryan's question of how much time commitment is involved. I'm on Pacific time, and tend to stay online until late in the evenings. $\endgroup$
    – David Eppstein
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 1:44
11
$\begingroup$

Ryan Williams

(meta)

I'll accept, but the amount of time that I can devote to the site will vary unexpectedly from week to week. I'll make an effort to visit at least once a day (if only briefly). And if turns out that you find less delinquent moderators, don't feel bad about replacing me.

I'm in the Pacific time zone.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Thanks for the nomination! While I know some TCS, I'm ignorant about what the level of commitment for a moderator is supposed to be on such a site. E.g., how many minutes/hours a day? Any rough ideas about that? $\endgroup$
    – Ryan Williams
    Commented Aug 29, 2010 at 5:28
  • $\begingroup$ I think the best idea is to do what you can. hard to imagine spending more than hour or two each day on moderation tasks if you don't want to get burnt out. OTOH, this is temporary... $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 29, 2010 at 6:05
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ In my experience, it doesn't require much more than you're already doing. It just means that you have more tools at your disposal. $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Aug 29, 2010 at 10:19
10
$\begingroup$

Anand Kulkarni

(meta)

Decline

$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ please note: the reason this site even exists is because of Anand ! he set it up on area51 ! $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 24, 2010 at 18:53
  • $\begingroup$ Though I appreciate the nomination, and will continue to do my best to be active, I may not be the most suitable choice given the other (excellent) suggestions here! Many of the other choices are both better known and have had more time to be active during the private beta. $\endgroup$
    – Anand Kulkarni
    Commented Aug 27, 2010 at 16:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Anand: For what it's worth, I think that you would be much better suited to this than I am. $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Sep 1, 2010 at 17:38
9
$\begingroup$

Jukka Suomela

(meta)

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Jukka is another very active user on meta, diligently monitoring the parent site for issues to be addressed. $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 29, 2010 at 6:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I agree, Jukka is attentive, which is important in a moderator. But I have a concern - he is maybe a little gung-ho with issues like tagging and CW. A moderator should be more laid back, otherwise there will be friction. $\endgroup$
    – Charles Stewart
    Commented Aug 30, 2010 at 12:59
  • $\begingroup$ we all have a lot to learn about this. and we will :) $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 30, 2010 at 16:52
  • $\begingroup$ I should add that I've been impressed at the good judgement @Jukka has shown since I wrote that comment above. In the event we have a third temporary moderator, +1 from me. $\endgroup$
    – Charles Stewart
    Commented Sep 15, 2010 at 8:48
9
$\begingroup$

Noam Nisan

(meta)

$\endgroup$
9
$\begingroup$

Jeff Erickson

(meta)

$\endgroup$
9
$\begingroup$

Joshua Grochow

(meta)

Decline. I appreciate the nomination, and I've had a lot of fun and learned a lot participating actively in the site for the past couple weeks, but I do plan on stepping back my involvement (not completely, just significantly) and returning to focusing on being a grad student.

PS - I'm not nearly as concerned as Charles Stewart is about the "barely adequate" slate of accepted moderators. It doesn't matter if we have the bare minimum number if they're all good moderators.

$\endgroup$
8
$\begingroup$

András Salamon

(meta)

Decline: I will not be able to contribute significantly for the next month at least.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Compared to others, András has had plenty of involvement on meta which boosts his suitability. $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Aug 24, 2010 at 17:57
6
$\begingroup$

Daniel Apon

(meta)

Decline

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I appreciate the nomination (I assume because of site rep, no?), but I can't guarantee my consistent availability to do the job, so I'll have to decline. Sorry :( $\endgroup$
    – Daniel Apon
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 9:36
5
$\begingroup$

Aaron Sterling

(meta)

Accept

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Just saw this, sorry. I'll ACCEPT (if still needed), at least as a temporary moderator, because I don't see anyone in the Central US time zone yet, and I've modded a (very different) web site before. $\endgroup$
    – Aaron Sterling
    Commented Sep 2, 2010 at 0:01
3
$\begingroup$

Charles Stewart

(meta)

Accept. I'm Berlin time (Central European time), and can usually be pretty responsive during GMT 08h30 to 14h30.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ I'm happy to serve as moderator, but I'm not convinced the site has a future. Optimism is a virtue that others have in greater quantity, I hope. $\endgroup$
    – Charles Stewart
    Commented Aug 25, 2010 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ @Charles: What's your concern? To narrow a focus? Too much overlap with other sites? $\endgroup$
    – Shane
    Commented Aug 25, 2010 at 14:02
  • $\begingroup$ I'm also curious as to the source of your pessimism. $\endgroup$
    – Suresh Venkat
    Commented Aug 25, 2010 at 14:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Suresh: meta.cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/144/how-are-we-doing/… $\endgroup$
    – Charles Stewart
    Commented Aug 26, 2010 at 9:27

You must log in to answer this question.

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