« first day (6 days earlier)      last day (19 days later) » 

12:04 AM
@Mithrandir You keep telling people not to vote for you ... you do know you can withdraw your nomination in the next 20 hours? :-)
3
 
 
1 hour later…
1:05 AM
@randal'thor Now why would i do that?
 
I'm not saying you should, just wondering why you don't, if you think people shouldn't vote for you.
 
I did say that i was joking...
 
 
1 hour later…
2:23 AM
@MikeEdenfield one of the candidates later had their account deleted. Three more nominees withdrew during the primary phase.
(which, yes, sorta made the whole primary pretty pointless)
@Mithrandir you should probably stop, if you're serious about wanting to be a mod.
3
 
@Shog9 Yup, i am stopping
 
 
3 hours later…
5:47 AM
@Ixrec You're missing something: Adam is an employee so the diamond shows up on all sites.
 
 
12 hours later…
5:21 PM
<2 hours until it's election time!
 
@Keen Shoulda done that an hour ago.
<3 hours.
 
Did they ever compile the questions and create a meta post so we could reply to the top 8 questions?
 
Haven't yet; there's still two hours open to vote on questions
 
@ArtOfCode heh
@JackBNimble No because the deadline is in the future.
 
Future smuture, that's what I say.
 
5:33 PM
Campaign promise: repeal the laws of time
 
5:47 PM
that sounds like something a time traveling robot would say
 
A vote for @JasonBaker is a vote for RONDO!
 
Hah, that is absurd
You cannot prove I have ever time-travelled
 
@JasonBaker Neither can I prove you have not.
 
Curses, my plot is discovered
 
5:53 PM
schroedingers time machine.
 
6:34 PM
Hrm. I've not been on in a month or so, is there a reason none of the current mods are running again?
 
@JohnP Because they're not being removed.
One hour left...
 
Oh hey, @CreationEdge threw in their hat
I guess we got our primary
2
 
at the last minute, too
 
@Mithrandir Ah, ok. Makes sense.
 
I liked my chances better when no one was running against me.
 
6:48 PM
@JackBNimble Now you're up against ME. :)
 
Ominous.
 
7:27 PM
Stupid DST, I thought the nominations closed half an hour ago, but instead there's another half hour to go!
 
could be worse, I was expecting them to close 12 hours ago
 
8:00 PM
 
Primary closes in 4 days.
 
@JasonBaker 58 seconds late, how dare you?
 
When does the Q&A thread show up? Is that this evening, or do we wait for the primaries to close?
never mind
 
0
Q: 2016 Moderator Election Q&A - Questionnaire

Grace NoteIn connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected from an earlier thread have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. Not every question was compiled - as noted, we o...

 
@JackBNimble there was never a point where no one was running against you this election...
 
8:09 PM
@MikeEdenfield When it was just you and me, we weren't running against each other, just for ourselves.
 
oh right.
we should go back there.
so what happens if more than one person ties for last in the primary?
did we cover this yet?
 
@MikeEdenfield not whilst I was about
 
I don't remember that coming up either
it looks unlikely though
 
6
A: What math decides who is eliminated during election primaries?

WardI have no idea where to find the official answer, but based on what happened on ServerFault last year (where I had +22/-12 and the other guy had +27/-17), in the case of a tie in the primary, the person who was nominated first goes on to the final Election. I don't know if this is still the case...

 
unless two candidates with negative scores are considered tied because they're shown as 0
 
8:13 PM
No one's posted answers to the questionnaire yet?! Downvotes for all candidates!
 
@Keen you’re so impatient. :P anyway, done
 
@Keen Probably won't make a difference compared to all the people who already voted for all of them. ;-P
 
holy cow
> Have you ever been suspended
where did THAT come from?
 
@MikeEdenfield Gilles.
And a whole lotta quick upvotes, it seems.
 
ugh.
I have been suspended from chat, once.
Thanks @NapoleonWilson
i don't even really know what it was for.
 
8:16 PM
@MikeEdenfield ?_?
 
apparently no one knows
 
Well, Richard told me you were the one who banned me, I think.
 
@MikeEdenfield so did @slytherincess but let's not discuss why...
 
@MikeEdenfield Uhuh?
 
@MikeEdenfield Richard couldn't have known.
Nobody can, except perhaps devs and Shog.
 
8:19 PM
this is probably true.
I can't even remember what the exact comments were anymore.
one of them was about M&TV and speculative answers.
maybe one of the mods can go look them up so I'm not lying on my Q&A
 
I can see I unsuspended you once, but the suspension record doesn't show who suspended if it was done via a flag.
@MikeEdenfield Aug 8 and 11 2015, and Sep 9 2015. The last of those was deemed invalid.
 
Pff, I certainly don't remember banning you, maybe it was me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ But when Richard says it, I guess it's the truth...? ;-)
 
I know the dates, I found them in the chat log where I whined about it and Richard told me "I thought it was hilarious"
:)
 
Oh right. Want the quotes? None of them are that offensive, really.
 
Not that it would make a difference for the questionaire who banned anyone, let alone the exact circumstances of each and every little 30 minutes chat suspension. I guess as we all know, they're not particularly rare anyway.
 
8:23 PM
@NapoleonWilson There are few people who have totally unblemished records, in chat.
 
@ArtOfCode Sure.
 
I mean apart from us. Obviously. ;)
 
nominees ho are less active in chat are less likely to have chat bans.
when you're online in chat 12 hours a day 7 days a week....
 
He's got a point
 
8:53 PM
@MikeEdenfield Hmm, I still can't see it.
 
I hope that my position as blog master means I automatically get to win question #4.
 
I'm just surprised we haven't gotten a daily series of blog posts over the past week outlining that @JackBNimble is clearly the best mod candidate.
 
maybe its just me, but it feels like we have way more votes than people who could have reasonably actually read all of the nominee's answers and considered them with any amount of seriousness.
especially since only 3 candidates have answers yet
 
@Keen I think that would be viewed negatively by the community at large.
 
@phantom42 You don't say? You mean most voters don't read the questionaire at all? Call the cops! ;-)
 
9:02 PM
@JackBNimble Thankfully, people could voice that with more blog posts.
 
(I hope that wasn't too sarcastic, though. Sorry if it was. It was meant as more fun than anything.)
 
@NapoleonWilson call the cm's. ban everyone who's already voted
@NapoleonWilson i figured as much
i know most people are voting on rep/name recognition. it's just disappointing.
 
@phantom42 Well, there are at least genuine meta porposals for making answering the questionaire mandatory. Which I think is a good idea (though, of course still won't require people to read 'em).
As I'm sure there's at least one candidate who won't go out of his way to answer it (disregarding if he has a realistic chance of winning anyway).
@JasonBaker Just so you know, even on meta [tag:...] links to the main site tags. There's [meta-tag:...] for actual tags on meta.
 
@NapoleonWilson Huh, I did not know that.
 
Afterall, you're certainly much more likely to need to link to main site tags on meta. There's not many scenarios where you really want to link to a tag in a main site post.
 
9:09 PM
hm. what happens if i try to edit a nominee's post?
 
@phantom42 I found it interesting that the primary voting patterns are not quite lining up with total rep score.
 
@MikeEdenfield not yet, perhaps. it's a long road till final count
 
@phantom42 there is one anomoly in particular that has me scratching my head.
 
also, it's possible that some people may be voting just to keep people in the election right now
 
@phantom42 Some people might read the questionnaire just out of boredom before the actual election starts in four days. That could be an advantage of having a primary.
 
9:11 PM
@MikeEdenfield Because all the people who read meta hate you while the common passerbies love you? ;-)
 
@NapoleonWilson no I'm actually right where I expected to be except for one oddity.
 
@Loong good point, assuming they come back/care enough to re-consider their votes
how long does the primary run?
 
@MikeEdenfield Hmm, I admittedly wouldn't have expected that many downvotes on your answer. (Though, I have no exact breakdown, I just noticed that it got lower and lower while I was reading).
 
oh. derp. 4 days
 
my answer or my primary nomination?
 
9:13 PM
answer only has 1 dv
 
@MikeEdenfield The answer. The nomination still stands pretty well. A few rare downvotes are always in. But seeing how the answer is as good as the nomination (and of course says pretty much the same as all the other meta answers anyway, as usual) it is a bit surprising that it's voted so low. But well, I guess on meta personal factors come much more into play than in the election.
 
Hmm? His answers post only has one DV
Or are you talking about something else?
 
@ryan Hmm, seemed like more. But maybe it just went from 1 to 0 while I read. Still strange that it doesn't have as much as the other answers.
 
@JackBNimble " disclose the natural of their suspension" I don't know if there are natural reasons for suspension :P
 
@ryan Oh great, someone is actually reading what I said.
 
9:20 PM
bats, I believe, have a few of them
 
This is always what torpedoes my election.
 
@JackBNimble I'm reading what everyone said
or at least skimming it
 
Has there ever been an election where someone actually like made a campaign video and linked it via YouTube?
That would be taking moderator elections to the extreme.
 
Lol, SE might have to implement policies against super PAC's to get moderators elected.
 
user132126
Wow, so many votes already!
 
9:24 PM
<-- won't vote till most people have had a chance to post an answer post
Seems irresponsible to do otherwise.
 
Vote early, vote often.
 
user132126
Wish I had my laptop to answer everything right now.
 
user132126
"How will your moderator practices be shaped by the person in question?"
What person?
 
The person in the question
 
@CreationEdge User1 does something to draw attention of mods. How does your relationship with User1 affect what you're doing?
 
user132126
9:29 PM
Wow, took the case off my tablet and it's so tiny.
 
Man, User1 is such a dick.
 
probably posted spoilers about TFA
ban that bastard
 
user132126
That's more clear. Thanks.
 
user132126
Is that your official stance regarding spoilers?
 
9:45 PM
@NapoleonWilson Much obliged
 
 
2 hours later…
11:38 PM
@MikeEdenfield as primary and answer votes come in, it's interesting to see the scores diverge. a highly voted primary nominee with the lowest answer score.
 
At this point I'd be willing to put money on two of Jason, alex, or null winning, so I'm pretty much gonna tune out for a week unless someone comments on my Q&A.
 
I'm surprised Null has so many votes
 
@MikeEdenfield yeah short of answering questions on that, there's not much you can do
@ryan on the primary itself?
 
I could abuse the blog as a way to get votes.
 
@phantom42 yea
 
11:42 PM
remember that you can vote for as many as you want there
so "you get a vote and you get a vote and you get a vote"
 
I guess it's in relation to how many votes Mike and Jack have that I'm surprised by his total
 
Maybe he lucked out in the randomization and he appeared at the top more than us when people hit the page.
Or maybe people genuinely want him to win more than us.
 
tbh I just upvoted everyone I felt would be a good mod, which is more than half of them
I'll probably have to think a bit harder for the real election, maybe I'll find the time to read the questionnaires by then
 
Why is @Mithrandir's answer block greyed out?
 
@JackBNimble Does it have many downvotes?
 
11:48 PM
 
@Keen Well, 3, I wouldn't call that many.
 
mike needs to photoshop that
 
yep, -3 is the threshhold for grayness
 
By the way, @Keen or whomever. This page scifi.blogoverflow.com/contribute is outdated on the list of Mods.
 
@JackBNimble Now it's accurate, forever.
 

« first day (6 days earlier)      last day (19 days later) »