The format is open, feel free to ask your question(s) unprompted, however please be mindful of whether or not candidates have answered the previous questions so that they don't get behind and start missing questions. Other than that, feel free to jump in.
Candidates, please use the reply feature so that questions and their answers are linked together. (Hover your mouse over the left of the message, click the down arrow, click reply)
When a question is asked, I'll star it - please star it yourself also to help! Please save stars for the questions so that candidates can refer to the star list to make sure they haven't missed a question.
We will be creating a digest version of the town hall chat after it is completed. This digest will take the form of a question on meta, containing all the questions asked as well as their answers for easier reading.
There's a system message up on the site, so we may get some stragglers joining us.
The candidates I see here are: @Mvy, @AviD, @ScottPack, @nealmcb, @HendrikBrummermann, @JeffFerland, and @RoryAlsop. Graham couldn't make this time but he can certainly add responses for the digest.
I get the feeling due to the silence here, that we've all gotten to know each other fairly well enough by being "the usual suspects" so there's not a whole lot to ask.
@JeffFerland Well, being a moderator gives you binding vote. That is a good thing for the day-to-day management, like closing evident off-topic question or such.
@JeffFerland @RoryAlsop's points are good, as is @Mvy's point. But the latter can also be a negative, causing moderators to be reluctant to vote on a close issue when consensus isn't clear.
@JeffFerland One thing I really like about Stack Exchange is the very friendly community. On Usenet in the security groups new users often get extremely unfriendly replies that are not related to the topic at all. There are very little of these insults here. But for the rare cases, it's good if someone can edit comments. And ask people to be more friendly with some kind of official background.
@JeffFerland While Trusted Users have many of the same powers as moderators, the little diamond brings with it a little more authority. When users see that they feel that they are being addressed by an ambassador of the site as opposed to simply a "field expert". This brings with it a more subtle method to guide actions and potentially squelch problems before they really come to fruition.
@JeffFerland there is also the circumstance that someone with lower rep may actually be a very good moderator. They may just not be getting the Q&A in to get a high rep. And conversely, someone with high rep may not be suited to moderating.
@JeffFerland I feel that as I am trying to focus heavily on promoting our community to grow it, the moderator insight to trend statistics is very valuable. As some of you know, I made a real (and thankfully, successful) effort to get @GraceNote to provide schwag to hand out at DEFCON, and I'm planning a concerted effort to do the same at upcoming conferences (an upcoming BSides and a Shmoocon). I hope to be able to use that information to be aware of how effective those actions are, as well as ...
@nealmcb Well the community is here to give the consensus when there is borderline questions. And of course, chat room is usually a good way to bring some interested people to give their opinion on topic they may not have seen.
Since Michael Mrozek isn't here, I'll steal a question of his:
A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
@Gilles - I tend to place quite high store in my real reputation, both in the security field, but also personally, so I kind of live real life with the expectation that it is all public and recorded. Works for me:-) It certainly doesn't worry me at all.
@Gilles To a certain extent I actually like that. For more professional sites, like this one, I should have been acting in a manner befitting a moderator for the duration. In my opinion if past posts of behavior are seen as unbefitting of a mod, then I have been doing something wrong anyway.
@Gilles I think when you walk around with that diamond, you stay away from casting your vote on things the community might be unsure about. You guide rather vote when possible. @RoryAlsop and @AviD have admittedly been quite good about doing that... discussing questions they think may be off-topic and getting consensus from us in chat.
So, in effect, because your tools are more powerful, you avoid using it as a vote where you might otherwise (e.g., vote to close).
@Gilles Yes, I absolutely agree with assessment. I am one of the core developers and game-master/admin of the open source game Stendhal. The community and especially the trouble makers look for every mistake of an GM. But that is okay, it's to be expected that moderators set a good example. Yes, mistakes do happen. Admitting them openly and getting the community involved is a good approach. Moderators are not alone. Difficult situations can and should be discussed.
@Gilles Well I see it as a responsibility. This is evidently a serious thing, that is bringing a little fear of wrong doing. But anyway, this shall not change the basis of my behaviour. I'll still answer question to provide guidance as usual, or comment. Of course, users know well how to complain on meta (I can find dozen of example on MSO). So yes this may give us more weight in discussion and as it not been taken too lightly, but it should not make us reluctant to act.
@Gilles Good point. But I already think a lot about attaching my handle to what I write and putting my best foot forward, so I don't worry about that. I also agree with @JeffFerland, as this relates to the previous question.
Continuing on the stolen questions, but if someone else has questions, please do post them!
How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
@Gilles A good moderator tries to calm heated situations down, tries to get back to a rational level of thinking. That's a good basis for fruitful discussions.
@Gilles This has happened a few times, and to be fair, a couple of the other candidates have done this a bit better than I by being a bit firmer. We need to encourage the good behaviours and be robust with the bad.
heh, I know who you're talking about... But yes, this has come up before. Generally, we try to calm heated discussions via targeted comments, if that doesn't work trying again. After that, there are chat options, and if worse comes to worst - an email message via the system.
@Gilles The first step has to be to let the user know that while they are making a valuable contribution, they are also generating a reasonable amount of tension within the community. If, after a discussion, and a warning or two, then temporary bans seem to be the most reasonable next step. This is definitely a hard situation to deal with, though.
@Gilles Since, if they actually are providing good content we want to keep them around, but if the overall culture of the community diminishes, or they are pushing away members, then something must be done. At the end of the day, this is, after all, about communities, not individuals.
@Gilles I will also admit that on one or two occassions, I've sniped back, just to put things in context (not an ad hominem attack, more contextual). @RoryAlsop has calmed me down on some of those... :)
@Gilles Well. Tough question indeed. But I think that the best thing is to inform the user about it. Chat, message are here for this. In the last resort, I suggest to discuss it with the other mods and/or with the community to find the best answer to it. We do not want to judge to quickly.
What is one contribution you feel demonstrates that you can be a good moderator? Can you briefly describe it or even link to it if you can (I know being put on the spot to come up with a link isn't the best so I won't require it (: )
@Gilles I wish there was more detail there... Valid flags and good answers seem contradictory. I take it that this would be a case where follow-up comments were hostile / attacking... and you just very slowly ramp up the pressure... add comments that redirect, then address the user through regular channels, then admin, then increasing temp bans.... others have accurately pointed out that you need to let them know they are valuable, but they must also be civil.
@Gilles The first step is to talk to this person, show that his work on answers is valued, and ask him to be more friendly, constructive way. I really like AviD's approach. He did edit the comment to remove the offensive part while keeping the valuable part. In the end the friendly community is more important than an trouble maker even if he posts good answers. But we should try to help this person to settle in before temporary suspending an account.
@RebeccaChernoff security.stackexchange.com/questions/6788 "It's easy to be not understand this, be nice to the new guy [and don't be snarky]"... and I feel that was exactly the correct reaction as a user or as a mod. Like in the question before, you start slow and easy and redirect.
@Gilles There are a wide variety of cases like this, and it depends on the details. If the flagged comments really detract from the site, then there needs to be more intervention than if it is a case of admirable passion about an issue that happens to trigger some other folks who are overly prone to flag things. Trying to reduce tensions and clarify this in private and if necessary in public is one step, but it all depends....
@RebeccaChernoff Flagging of course is the first thing I think about, but also my interests in the promotion of the community (blog, ...) and my participation to the community building in meta even if I'd wanted to do more.
@RebeccaChernoff Managing to defuse an individual who was very confrontational and argumentative (well, at least for now) who was being very abusive, but who also had some very valuable posts with high technical content. He was getting flagged an awful lot - so after using comments, then selective deletion I contacted him directly to explain where I thought he was valuable, and where he was causing issues. Since then, he has provided valuable answers without the battles. positive result.
@RebeccaChernoff as I already noted, I am a prolific commenter (I guess my teenage daughter gets her talkativeness from me), and editor/tagger. I try hard to get everyone on the same page...
@RebeccaChernoff I was very happy to help resolve some tension between @Ninefingers and @AviD back in April. I don't know if a link to that would be constructive, but can dig it out if folks would like.
@RebeccaChernoff Also I like to keep the question titles in proper format. Generally because the twitter feed would be non expressive if title stays the same.
@RebeccaChernoff Also, I think that being one of the "usual" suspects here helps... or encouraging editing questions to fit rather than closing them. Everybody here has an equal pro-active chance... mods are there to be available and reactive to the community; responding to flags more than acting on their own most of the time. You police... and you police in a way that is the least imposing manner possible.
@RebeccaChernoff Recently we had a bit of a dust-up regarding the various and sundry self-hosted SE sites and the business decision to shut them down. While there was a lot of conversation with other members of the group, and mods, eventually I did feel the need to actually get involved. While I did, in his words "...put a horribly fine point on your statement." I would like to think that I did a good job of helping to defuse the situation.
Ok, one from me. A question comes in and receives a highly up-voted answer that is technically wrong according to one or two members of the community. What action as a moderator, if any, do you take?
@Ninefingers Initially - wait for flags if unsure. Then discuss in chat. Then close, and be aware that it may be re-opened, altered, migrated or whatever. This happens a bit, especially on migrated-in questions
@RebeccaChernoff I spend quite a bit of time improving questions. This can be minor things such as making them easier to read. There is quite a number of question that started quite poorly and might have easily been closed as non constructive. But I think rewriting them into good questions, is very important for the side for two reasons: a) There have been amazing answers to those questions and b) helping new users to settle in instead of turning them away benefits the community.
@RoryAlsop I think (based on your comments of "close", "re-open", "migrate") you've mis-understood. @Ninefingers' question was about answers that are wrong, not questions.
@Ninefingers You weigh in if you know it, you stay away if you don't. If you get somebody like @ThomasPornin being the one who points out that it's technically wrong and you know by reputation that he is the somebody who is a master of their domain, you point that out. If it's civil, this isn't a moderator role -- it's a user role. The mods on SO aren't running around fixing technical comments on code.
@Ninefingers If it came with a migrated question, then in most cases the actions would be the same. In extreme cases, e.g. if the answer was migrated with already high nmber of wrong-votes, there has been a case that I encouraged the asker to close the original, and re-ask the question anew in the correct community.
@Iszi Ahhhhh - gotcha. Sometimes an answer may not be correct some time after initially posting, but the power here is with the community. Occasionally a mod will take decisive action, but this is mostly if there is abuse etc.
@Ninefingers Moderators are not here to correct the community but lead it. If the answer has at least some information which is correct, there is nothing to do, and the poster earned the reputation. However topic that shall be off-topic, or not suited to the site shall be removed. By the way, we can pinpoint the user that think answer are wrong to propose a new one or improve the existing.
@Ninefingers Much as @JeffFerland said. I see a moderator's role being that of responding to incidents and guiding the culture. In this situation, I do see it as, largely, a normal user issue to deal with. The problem, however, comes into play when you're dealing with a dangerously incorrect answer.
@Ninefingers In that situation I feel as though a mod may need to step in and possibly delete the post depending on how egregious it is. I do, however, feel that is should be strongly guided by user flags.
@AviD I think that's a very fair thing and again in the realm of power-user (though the unspoken diamond word power...). We know that other sites do have cases where answers get upvoted with info we know to be wrong... and for that the general action of mods has historically been to dissuade migrating questions late.
my turn: If you don't get elected, how will this affect your continuing participation on the site? Will you be discouraged, disillussioned, or disincentivized?
@AviD I cannot see how not being elected would affect my participation in the least. There is not a single candidate on this list that I would not want to be modding.
@Ninefingers This is a problem we often have with questions that are migrated from other sites such as StackOverflow and StartUps. I think this situation can be dealt with by normal users in most cases by adding comments.
@AviD I'll still do just the same (minus the special diamond powers) - as I did before the whim that singled me out to be pro-tem mod:-) I'm here because the community awareness piece of security is what I devote a good chunk of my real life to anyway
@Ninefingers In some cases I have edited an answer to add a note at the beginning pointing out that this answer was migrated from another side and therefore was likely not written with security in mind. There may be cases which justify moderator involvement, but those have to be looked at on a case by case basis.
@AviD I go into this knowing full-well we have more qualified candidates than we have slots, and we already have good people in the roles. I think I would be a great asset and provide some different advantages, but I don't expect to really be affected one way or the other by the outcome. If I win, I serve. If I lose, I offer to serve in the future... and I keep on trucking with a wonderful community of people.
@Ninefingers I agree with @JeffFerland that moderators aren't here to somehow "fix" technical errors, but judicious use of comments and discussion can usually deal with those issues also.
@ScottPack That's a very good point actually. Every candidate has demonstrated the willingness and resource to help develop, improve, publicise and provide input to sec.se - I'd be quite happy for any 3 to be the mods:-)
@AviD I will try to reach 10k sooner. :-) The current moderation team is doing excellent work and I have a high opinion on the other candidates, too. So I am not worried about the future of security.se
@RebeccaChernoff making mistakes in the early days - like voting to close, not realising it was instant, and being a bit quick on following a flag, although in the early days flags came a bit slower. So I had a couple of occasions when the community reversed my close (by slapping me in chat) so that was a bit embarrassing:-)
@GraceNote @RoryAlsop -- he is without ego in his role, a flagship of the site. I believe there is no regular user who doesn't know who he is and what he does for our community. The diamond should carry that -- and a great sense of humor (also a Rory trait).
@GraceNote I would have to say @Rory. He has the advantage of doing it, so we've been able to see what kind of a job he will do. Plus, in the short time I've had the pleasure of knowing him, I have gained a tremendous respect for him as a person and professional.
For the non-Pro-Tems: How do you feel about the challenges you may face if elected, which were brought up by @AviD and @RoryAlsop in response to @RebeccaChernoff's question about "toughest part of moderating"?
@GraceNote I would vote for @RoryAlsop . He already shown good dedication to sec.se by leading the blog and also good work as moderator. But of course, the choice is hard and all other has qualities.
@JeffFerland Spreading out the timezone / availability. I think that having mods in different timezones is as important as anything else. I think that there is unique statistical for helping to promote the community, and I really want to make use of that as well.
@GraceNote AviD for editing offensive parts out of comments while keeping the valuable parts and at the same time asking the person in question in a very constructive way to be friendly.
@GraceNote That is a really difficult one. I think @AviD has done a really good job from the very start (well before I came into the frame) - I also think that those who aren't mods have proven they can be.
@Iszi One of the biggest challenges I foresee would be dealing with the confrontational users. That is always something I have dreaded, but in my professional life I have been targeted as committee chairman because I, apparently, am fairly level headed when it comes to dealing with those types of situations. I am more nervous about the close vote issue. I am in lust with close voting, and having a binding vote scares me a bit.
@ThomasPornin hmmm - a bit random. Usually get a quick stint around 0730 GMT, some during the day, more from 1930 GMT, up until somewhere between 0100 and 0300
@ThomasPornin I have pinged a couple of folks (including Pieter Danhieux - who used to co-organise #brucon) who live in Australia now to see whether they may come on board
@Iszi I agree with Rory's assessment that the most difficult part are situations in which the community disagrees with a decision. I think the best approach to deal with this is to encourage discussion (for example invite to chat) and admit mistakes. Trying to be open about ones motivations and accepting disagreement by the community to overrule ones decisions.
@ThomasPornin I try to jump on the morning (around 5-6am UTC), usually pop in during the day at some point (if I'm not out at meetings and whatnot), and almost every evening, round 5-12pmUTC.
@ThomasPornin I am from West Europe and I usually have a look at security.se before work in the morning and again in the evening. This is around 5-7 and 18-22 GMT and a couple of glance in between which would be sufficient to deal with urgent matters.
@ThomasPornin I also keep the SE sites open in the background so that even if I am not actively chatting or going through the site, I can quickly check for alerts, chat messages, etc.
@JeffFerland I think I provide a good perspective, with the ability to appreciate how a variety of other people see things. When people feel seen and also see where each other are coming from, tensions are often reduced.
It has been proposed now and then to broaden the scope of the site to other aspects of security (locksmithing, airports, etc.). How do you feel about that?
How do you think the additional abilities and visibility on the site that you would gain as a moderator will help you to improve the existing content? Are there any particular improvement projects you've had in mind to undertake?
@Gilles I am actually a bit in favour personally, as I am a confirmed Information Security person, and find that the wider scope does impinge upon people who may consider themselves IT security. But I'm not forcing it, as the community is half in favour, half against, so far:-) Plus, Lockpicking is cool!
@Gilles I think physical security is part of the realm of IT security. I think we would have no influence on people who implement airport security, so we can skip that. More than anything, I think if the community is overwhelmingly in favor of something, that's the way we go and as stewards who represent, the moderators shall make it so.
@Gilles I think it depends significantly on the way the topic is presented. As part of my Information Security Analyst duties, I deal with physical access controls frequently. Lockpicking is actually an On-Topic job for me. Pentesting, for example, isn't just about hacking code, but also about slipping in through the back door (so to speak).
@Gilles I think we should not rush and jeopardise what we built so far. Changing the scope is not an easy thing and shall be dealt with care. Area51 is here to hatch ideas and if beta there fails, but had interesting points it may be worth welcoming thenew community. As for example, we now have a facebook site buillt over SO, and I think this can have offsrping somewhere.
@JeffFerland I argue have discussions with airport security folks every time I fly. Except in the USA, as I have no interest in actually being imprisoned. Airport security deals with a lot of the same risks and controls, but more hype and politics
@Gilles If this decision gets real we should have a community voting as we had about merging Ubuntu with Linux/Unix. StackOverflow combines many different programming languages which would easy provide enough content for independent sites, but it has one target group so it works very good.
