« first day (1 day earlier)      last day (25 days later) » 

12:50 AM
@enderland This is getting exciting! 3 more candidates and we have a primary.
@MattGiltaji Glad to see you jumped in!
@jmort253 Thanks. Exciting is the right word.
1 hour later…
2:19 AM
@MattGiltaji ATM machine? pet peeve alert!
2:34 AM
lol, I just love The TWP
2:55 AM
Anyone wanna know what it takes to be a moderator, or if you haven't nominated and aren't sure but are considering, or if you have nominated and want to know what to expect, this is an excellent read:
Jeff Atwood on May 17, 2009

We believe deeply in community moderation. That’s why we appoint Pro Tempore Moderators and, ideally, democratically elected community moderators for every site in our network. But what do community moderators do? The short answer is, as little as possible!

From the very first version of Stack Overflow faq way back in mid-2008, our goal has always been to give power back to the community:

Stack Overflow is run by you! If you want to help us run Stack Overflow, you’ll need reputation first. Reputation is a (very) rough measurement of how much the Stack Overflow community trusts you. R …

12 hours later…
3:18 PM
Huh, I've not seen maple_shaft in a long time!
3:51 PM
3 more for a primary!
1 hour later…
5:07 PM
@enderland I just wanted to bounce some ideas off you for rephrasing this moderator candidate question of yours :
A: Summer 2014 Moderator Election Q&A - Question Collection

enderlandWould you be willing to unilaterally close more popular questions such as this one which very clearly are off-topic, according to the site FAQ and guidelines, even if you are the only close vote? Oftentimes these questions can cause problems if not closed quickly as they pick up answers which ma...

What do you think about changing it to something like a scenario :

"You come across a highly popular question from the past that is very clearly off-topic for the site now. What do you do?"
from the past misses the point
@Rachel if the answer is "no" then there should be reasons why the answer is "no." I don't intend this question to be easy, I intend it to get very deliberately at the question of whether or not candidates are willing to enforce the site rules/policies as stated even if this is against "popular opinion." — enderland 17 secs ago
and include some suggestions for answers
@enderland Hrrm ok, it's your question
I dont like it though. I think it encourages mod candidates to answer "Yes, of course I'd vote to close it"
I disagree
when in reality, I want to see people who would say "No, I'd bring it up on meta or in chat or with other moderators to see what can be done first"
then it's a good question
5:10 PM
I don't want mod candidates to decide to close highly popular questions on their own
its a community-run site, not a moderator-run site
Even if they 100% are off topic?
This is why I want people to answer this question
If they are 100% off-topic, and an attempt has been made and failed to save the question, then I think it is fine
attempt can be a discussion on meta, in chat, etc
if you want to keep the question as-is, what about clarifying it to specify that discussions about the question have been made and it has been deemed that the question should remain unchanged, and that there is no way it could be edited to be on topic
Then I think it would be a good question to ask moderator candidates
I want to know if the moderator candidates are willing to enforce site off topic by closing off topic questions when the question is 100% clearly and unquestionably off topic
without any attempt at salvaging the question first?
or discussing it with the users that have voted to leave it open?
That's a fine question, but I think it needs clarification if that is your goal
1 min ago, by enderland
I want to know if the moderator candidates are willing to enforce site off topic by closing off topic questions when the question is 100% clearly and unquestionably off topic
5:17 PM
the high rep users can vote to re-open after, right?
Questions which get answers to an off topic question cause consierably more problems than questions being prematurely closed
because after that point, it's nearly never salvageable - you should know this
So the only way to address this is to close it before it picks up answers to an off topic question
Ummmm have you forgotten how many "heroic edits" I've done in the past? ;)
Most questions here pick up answers very quickly
And most users here don't vote to close
hrm I kind of see your point
but I still don't like your question as it is phrased now
and if a question does not get closed quickly, picks up multiple answers, it is nearly impossible to have a heroic edit
because then you also have to deal with answers and it creates a TON of work when the question should have been put on hold to begin with
5:20 PM
I read it as implying that a moderator should close everything first, unilaterally, without community discussion or consensus or giving the OP a chance to edit
closing a question is completely different than deleting a question (even on a migration, you could immediately unlock it as a mod)
I get where you're going and the sort of answer you want to see, but I think in that case it should be edited to specify that parameters of the question
39 messages moved from The Water Cooler
@enderland Anyways, to continue my train of thought, if you're looking to find out if mod candidates are willing to close a popular question unilaterally, it seems like you should specify some parameters, such as a salvage attempt has been made, or it's been discussed already on meta, or the OP has insisted his/her question be untouched.
If you're looking to find out how the mods deal with a popular new question that is clearly off-topic, then perhaps you should specify that more in the terms of "a new off-topic question is posted and is immediately popular. How do you react to it"
instead of simply asking "Do you close it unilaterally"
6:03 PM
I'm fine with a question like that requiring explanation for an answer, I don't really want to make it easier to answer - if people want to give short answers rather than adding some length to it that's fine with me
I dont have time right now to reword it and quite frankly it wouldn't be fair to the people who've upvoted that question so far to change the intent that meaningfully
maybe you could add it as a separate question Rachel?
6:26 PM
Hrrm I could but I feel both versions are very different and could both be a duplicate of Enderland's question, depending on which way users read it
Besides, there's already a good question for one version of the question :
A: Summer 2014 Moderator Election Q&A - Question Collection

Matt Giltaji Asked by Monica Cellio during the previous election When you see a question or answer with major issues, such as being argumentative or poorly-written, what tool do you reach for first and why?

1 hour later…
7:28 PM
7:51 PM
@RhysW Hiya :)
8:34 PM
@Rachel Exactly. We certainly don't want to elect Mark Trapp Part 2.
@JimG. Mark was simply upholding the rules of the site the way he interpreted them. I can see where Enderland is coming from though, about closing fast with the willingness to reopen. It's the closing fast with no willingness to work at reopening that I really object to and would be concerned about
9:10 PM
my n00b is showing but Mark Trapp?
Q: No more "Chairman Mao reincarnate" :(

Rachel@MarkTrapp I just heard you're stepping down from your position as moderator and have to say, I'm sorry to see you go. We may not always see eye-to-eye, and I hated the fact you used your ability to close questions as much as you did, but I still think you did a great job as a moderator, particu...

@gnat thanks
Shog9 on August 08, 2012

It’s been a few weeks now since Joel kicked off our “summer of love”. There’ve been some excellent discussions in the blog comments and on Meta, and we’ve tried to present some hard data on how objectively “nice” we are. But it’s high time to talk about what place “niceness” really has on Stack Exchange. And to do that, we need to start by talking about you:

You, sir, are a jackass.

And that’s ok.

Stack Overflow wasn’t created to be some utopian ideal of peace and love. When Jeff & Joel set out to create this system, they knew full well the sort of problems that face online commun …

I would rather close a question even if I can't edit it than leave it without closing
I understand not everyone agrees with this and I am more than fine having people disagree with that ;)
its hard to disagree with a giant smiley face
1 hour later…
10:27 PM
> you have 0 flags, 0 reviews, 1 edit, and 1 meta answer. When you say you 'don't like voting to close posts for no reason' and 'want to keep our community clean' it isn't clear what a good reason to close posts is to you, or what keeping the community clean means to you
^^^ not surprising to get candidates like that, given how many users get fast repz by answering inappropriate questions promoted by hot list. Not that I complain but system appears to give us quite a strong push towards becoming "self-help group for commiserating"..‌​.
Q: At smaller sites, penalize hot questions having 3-4 close votes

gnatAt smaller sites (up to 50-100 questions a day average) closing a question takes hours or even days. As an example, this SO question has got 5 close votes in 15 minutes, while its twin at Programmers has been struggling to get 3rd vote for over 10 hours. "Twin" here means, same question has bee...

...another recent example: 3 votes to close, 2 down, #19 (of 100) in the hot list with "32.619 hotness points". "...watching the 'hot network questions' leads me to think that several of the recent sites are gigantic broken windows of self-absorbed subjectivity" -- sure why would it be different when system works like that — gnat Aug 1 at 22:57

« first day (1 day earlier)      last day (25 days later) »