By the way, @D.W., I'm curious: you state in your nomination that you got into CS via Usenet. Does that mean you don't have formal CS ed? What is it you do?

Now I feel bad. Should you be not fast asleep, @D.W.? :D

@Raphael, I do have a formal CS education, fortunately. I was a math major as an undergraduate, but then got excited about CS (and cryptography) -- partly due to Usenet -- and then switched over to CS and did my PhD in CS. These days my day job involves research in the area of computer security. I loved the CS classes I took: so inspiring!

@D.W. Ah, I see. Good for you then, that you learned what interested you more while still at university!

Don't feel bad: I'm up anyway. Paper deadline! :-)

@D.W. Uhhh, poor you. Good luck!

Oh, we have another nomination! This time, a rather unknown candidate. (At least to me.)

I wonder: under which circumstances should we comment what under nominations?

Votes of confidence can be expressed by just voting for the candidate. Or should there be active lobbying? (My instinct is no.)

Should we point out perceived problems with a candidate?

@D.W. what is the title of your Phd or area of study?

> Comments are active during the length of the nomination phase – please comment freely, particularly if there is any way a nominee introduction can be improved or refined to be more clear.

example comments can be seen on the 2011/ 2014 Theoretical Computer Science elections here

@Juho also in favor of your nomination/ candidacy.

@WanderingLogic plz run!

I do encourage more nominees, especially from people who have already expressed an interest in governance and moderation by guiding other users in comments, chat and meta, by making use of moderation tools such as flags, close/reopen votes and review queues, etc.