@Akixkisu I'm not convinced how much benefit there would be publishing such a list, so I will not be doing so. I'm not sure if we need another opportunity, other than the vote itself, to express those kind of opinions

@Tiggerous as the basis of discussion about candidates which hasn't happened outside of "why is person y not running as well, and I think person z should run." But maybe you are correct - conceivably I shouldn't waste time on ensuring that we have good moderators by discussing candidates before the votes come in.

@Akixkisu Akix, you are expected to treat your fellow members with respect. If someone disagrees with your methods, don't be so disrespectful as to suggest they have no agreement with your goal or don't want good moderators. Obviously they do, anyone does, but this doesn't mean they have to support what you're doing.

I'll be more explicit than I was previously. I obviously want us to elect good moderaters, and electing them as such is a shared responsibility of our entire community. Based on the candidates who have already put themselves forward I am confident this will not be an issue.

But that's not why I'm against publishing my own personal list of candidates, with arguments for and against their election. Ranking these candidates corporately is obviously an entirely necessary part of the election process. But ranking them personally is, I think, a risky process.

I don't think it would benefit any of the candidates, or community spirits generally, to see lists of people, who've selflessly offered to volunteer their time, with critiques of their suitability for the position publically discussed. While such a thing would be possible to do, discussing candidate's merits only, with no negativity attached - I think it would be a tricky line to walk.

There are lots of different things that are entirely normal and accepted parts of elections outside of the SE network. Many of which I would personally not want to bring to how I approach an election here on RPG:SE.

I think that discussions of the qualities, skills, and principles to look for in a moderator would be quite beneficial. Whether or not specific candidates meet those qualifications is, I think, something better left for each voter to consider for themselves than making the subject of public debate.

For example, I think it's important for moderators to develop the skill of knowing when something's on fire and needs to be put out right away, or when it's better to give the community time and space to self-correct. Too much inclination to put out the smallest embers and the community becomes overdependent on proactive moderation; too much of a hands-off approach and the community becomes fractious and overgrown.

Since it's impossible to see that action in someone who's not a mod yet, I think about what other actions might demonstrate the same principles, like not jumping into every comment discussion, but leaving thoughtful comments at appropriate moments.

wow

@Akixkisu I am warning you specifically not to disrespect your fellow citizens in this chat. That is all.