Why did @Xander see fit to answer three commenters below his meta answer, but, unsurprisingly, pretend I don't exist? I upvoted the post, and agree with most of it; I must commented that the accommodation he allowed for rare cases of OCD "if users must answer".... This has persisted for ten days. Xander finds time to respond to some, but somehow, not me. I'm okay if he needs a few more days to decompress, But I do not want to reexperience, in another mod, what I experienced when targeted

by Arjifi.

Yikes... ^^^^^ I forgot to provide a link to the meta question, in question, and the comments below your answer, Xander: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/33774/….

I've noticed many place, @Xander, where you immediately leave when others are asking questions. And rather abruptly, with a comment suggesting "since others don't get it.... or since "no one gets me", I'm leaving... on meta, in chatrooms. And you do that so quickly in disagreements, I think that's becoming a problematic concern. But, though you want to make me think you don't pay any attention, I know you are. If you feel safer hiding, that's okay too.

@quid Is there any chance you or the team, could convince Daniel Fischer, for a few weeks, to stop in here and there, in CURED, or more importantly, the mod chat??? CURED, The CAFE, and this office should not be deprived, except when you're here, which is incredibly helpful, .... Just wondering.

@amWhy IIRC he was not on the site for months; I do not communicate off-site. Thus there is not much I can do. Since it's not the first time this happens there is at least a good chance he'll come back eventually.

@quid Do you not grasp how this matters to users on this site. They see: This site has 10 moderators! Where's the disclaimer: "At any given time, even for weeks at a time, there may only be two moderators, and for some, even moderators have no clue where they are."

@amWhy it's not clear what you expect me to do about it. Soon he'll likely be auto-demoded. The only thing I might be able to do is speed this up, which IMO serves no purpose.

At least 5 are active on a rather regular basis currently.

Three of them in chat.

You in particular, with respect to Aloizio, deflated the amount of time required to be a good moderator. That election I intentionally asked an question that was popular enough to be on the final mod questionairre. I think it is an extremely relevant question, yet your assured users, "it not much time."

I don't think it's a good idea to have only power users as moderators.

@quid No, in chat we have you, and robjohn. Xander has no time to converse... he may handle flags

@amWhy well since a couple days maybe.

At the risk of being found provocative, I'll add that there might be one or two more in chat if they would not berated.

More broadly the insistence of "you should be here more" rather has the opposite effect.

@quid Throughout summer, while he's got an impossible situation of teaching calc and precalc this summer, and have quality time with his daughter. And I have not intention to ask him to give that up. But summer over, he'll be teaching, and continue his work with the AMA Next Cohort..... with all of you, it is always something, and each of you is so adept to justifying absences from math.se, over and over again. It makes for out-of-touch moderator actions, etc., etc.,

@quid I don't think Jeff Atwood supported double the mods they could expect to be active. It is dishonest to the community. Hence, you all really need to disclose that on the moderator page. I know how things work, but I interact daily with users who sincerely want to help, and have ideas, and reach out; no mod responds... Mod's now wait until CRISIS MODE, which could have been altogether avoided. And when any one complains, a user, like me, is shamed, for the mere reason,

@amWhy reach out where to what end?

That mods act as though only they see all, any user is automatically biases.... I saw you change someone/ on occasion, since becoming a mod, and definitely, I liked Xander as a person, more, before he became a mod. I do think, and I have witnessed it... that mods have, without repercussions, acted impulsively, harmfully, ... And I'm not talking about Jyrki. Jyrki was the one and only moderator that has always remained stable in his actions, humble. And with respect to me, you are the

the only mod to acknowledge mutual misunderstanding. Actually Xander has too. Do mods who expect others to honor them as the gospel, actually think any user does? That they aren't rolling their eyes behind their backs? There is too little transparency, over which I realize site mods have little control; there is no way to appeal a sanction. Worst of all is meta. Users are at the mercy of some site mod from somewhere, determining a matter they have no clue about, and there is no way

whatsoever, for them to challenge it. A mod's verdict becomes SE/SO truth. Bottom line, Stack Exchange, each site, will never escape gaming: awesome high rep users!!!! Mod elections, role-playing... In fact, this site, the more I think about it, has become on online role playing game. And I feel like an absolute sucker for having devoted so many years is what literally amounts to nothing bur a game. Poof!

@quid I'm not pointing fingers nor blaming any person in particular. I guess I've become utterly disillusioned, though I thought I passed through earlier more moderate bouts of questioning. And for some people anyone, at least it's true of me, it's hard for me to reconcile the 11 years I spent in a game, that I really really believed mattered.,

@amWhy I'm not sure what to reply. Maybe it can help to take a break and come back and see how it feels.

I will never regret the wonderful connections with people I respect and love, and have shared so much time with. So I don't believe it was all a waste. And the people is why I stick around. So perhaps, because I include you and Xander among my friends, I'm more apt to notice your absences. Alexander Gruber too.

@quid I'll think about it. It may be partly that I'm kind of "coming down" from the adrenaline of "evangelizing the EoQS", flagging, etc., and realizing it will still remain a struggle, though I think we now have more tools to work with. Anyway, I didn't not mean to dominate Math Mods' Office Chat!!! Thanks for listening, @quid.

@amWhy it's always interesting to talk.

@quid Saad, Jitendra, with many of us wondering the same, have gone a week without response to comments to Xander, etc., after noticing, and many of noticed the uptick, in low rep (50) bounties place by one user, or a sponsor, on questions destined for closure, to essentially "buy" another week, while avoiding closure. I encouraged Jitandra to post on meta: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/33786/…

If you read my comments, no one is asking to abandon the opportunity to bounty well asked questions. Since we don't want to create a new review queue to approve questions with potential bounties, I think many of us are wondering if we can rethink the auto ban on closing any or all bountied questions. Is it feasible, or even possible on this network, to have unlock such questions from closure? The link I provided is on math.meta, and @MartinSleziak provided some helpful links to posts,

...at least one of which was a similar question on meta.se. I think this question has recently become of concern, because of an uptick in bounties on very low quality questions. No rush. The post has been up for maybe an hour.

I replied something there.

I'll leave for now. See you!

@quid See you!! Thanks!

@amWhy The commenter and I disagree. We both said our piece, and I was explaining that I felt that the conversation had reached an end (neither of us was going to change the other's mind). Hence I was civilly bowing out of the conversation, and giving the other commenter a chance to have the last word, should they want it.

I think that you are reading way more into that comment than exists (ie you seem to think that it was heated, angry, frustrated, or upset---it was not).

@XanderHenderson No, I didn't see it that way. But you've bowed out a number of times, including a couple times with me. But most of all, I want to say hello!! Sincerely! If I'm reading to much into anything, I've felt like you, perhaps not intentionally, but do to circumstances, avoiding me. I've got your back, any time, any where, but I've gotten the impression, that I frustrate you. I've told quid this before, too, it would be absurd for me to expect much from half the mods on this site. ...

But you and quid, I might expect a lot, mainly because I trust you, and in part, unfairly due to the less active or absent mods. I know that is not fair. But we are all human, and we each have changes in schedule, etc. And I can be quite supportive of that. I think I do take things too personally sometimes, and I am prone to wonder whether the people I respect find me annoying.... In any case, I am just thrilled you commented here! ;D

Any other moderator (rather, any of five moderators) wanting to fill the void, has got to understand, that their prolonged absence is has left users more skeptical. I think Pedro has come a long way to reach out, and must of us are perfectly comfortable with Asaf..... But just as mods likely think users have unrealistic expectations, and to some extent we do; mod's have unrealistic expectations that they can walk in, take control, and they wonder why user don't immediately honor their verdict

That's quite unrealistic as well, on their part. I did not set out to write a book. Anyway, sorry I missed your earlier comment, @quid. And again, very glad to have the chance to better understand you, etc. Let I annoy the hell out of anyone, I'll leave well alone now.