@tyblu And that's why you can only nominate yourself

Speaking of nominating...

There's only 1 nomination. ):

yes, very.

that isn't good ):

Is this typical?

Well, before we hold an election we try to look at whether or not we think it will be a successful election.

Don't prove me wrong! ):

I figure that there's a good chance that anyone who applies will be a mod

Ideally we want there to be, oh I dunno, 5 nominations.

honestly, I like the mods we have... I would only want to change them if they need a break

It isn't a community election if 3 people nominate and are automatically added.

And less than 3 is bad.

Keeping the same moderators is ok, but it really should still go through an election. The pro tems are appointed. The community should elect them in, if nothing else than as a formality.

But if they don't nominate... (;

Heh... in one of the groups I'm with, the official brings a train whistle to the election meetings

ohhhh

I want a train whistle!

They blow the whistle after electing the president, et. al.

Since they just got railroaded

Either way, that means there actually is an election, not a cancelled one. (;

heh, mod for life

You know, it would help if you could provide a work-load estimate for "new mod candidates"

Like how much time a mod spends moderating, handling flags, etc

or how many flags/actions a mod needs to handle for a given site

For a new site without a lot of established 10k users, the moderator's job is almost transparent

Our community doesn't like to vote :)

If the site doesn't have too many flags (or things that should be flagged!), it could be as little as a few minutes a day.

The thing to remember is you aren't the only mod.

I'd say even on the heavier moderation sites (excluding SO because SO is crazy), maybe, maybe an hour, but broken up throughout the day? A few minutes here and there have to add up at some point I guess.

@RebeccaChernoff Hi Rebecca. I'll will nominate myself tomorrow. And @kortuk too, I don't know when.