« first day    last day (25 days later) » 

12:00 AM
should I not mention my stats in my nomination blurb? It seems like they purposely left things like rep vague in the signature.
@MikeEdenfield Well, most of it can be read on the stats page anyway (like number of posts on main and meta), while others are rather irrelevant (like reputation). But then again, which voter actually looks at the stats page anyway?
@MikeEdenfield Only 166 helpful flags?
@randal'thor I didn't cast a single flag for the first ~3 years I was on the site.
by then I had mod tools to handle closes.
it's one of the stats I have been trying to improve lately.
on the other hand, only 20 declined.
Wow, I've raised more helpful flags in the last 1.5 months than you have in 4.5 years.
@MikeEdenfield And some disputed?
I almost never flag anything because I almost never see anything flag-worthy
12:04 AM
14 disputed.
I'm not sure if that means I'm too inclusive or if everyone else is too good at nuking the real crap
I think the bulk of my flags are for "obsolete" comments
disputed flags shouldn't be weighted much in anything
A: What is the difference between disputed and declined flags?

bfavarettoDeclined flag: if the flag was reviewed by a moderator who did not agree with you (for other, spam, offensive and comments flags) they decline them. Flagging to close a question or as duplicated will push the flag to the close review queue, and if the review is completed without any user casting ...

A: What is a disputed flag?

Tim StoneA disputed flag is whenever your flag was dismissed as neither helpful or declined, someone reviewed your flag but no conclusive action was taken. This is intended for use in cases where the validity of a flag is ambiguous. Currently, the following scenarios may result in a flag being disputed:...

@phantom42 Richard's description of what a disputed flag is:
in Mos Eisley, Aug 25 '15 at 21:58, by Richard
@MikeEdenfield - It's where I read it, and was too drunk to press the right button
12:23 AM
@MikeEdenfield "Rep: 53,571" - with that level of precision, I fully expect hourly updates to your nomination.
@Ixrec Um, it's right on the main site and meta, in the sidebar.
and that is what I get for being in the 2% of users whose browser window does not accomodate the sidebar
1:03 AM
@randal'thor I'm probably gonna take that out; I just copied and pasted stuff from my profile page :)
think that would fit on a t-shirt?
CMs shouldn't take sides :-/
It's supposed to be a community election!
let me bask
1:21 AM
@MikeEdenfield It's not that he's wrong, though.
Q: Should Community Managers remain impartial during Moderator elections?

RichardCommunity Managers (e.g. paid employees of Stack Exchange) play a large part in the background running of the SE sites and can be seen to exert enormous influence over users. We've seen that there's modest interest in Community Moderators weighing in on Moderator Elections... Should existing m...

@Loong Buahahaha!
2:02 AM
@randal'thor Feel free to take the other side if you can find it.
2:19 AM
how do you decide how many moderators need to be elected?
aw, that doesn't work
actually saying "five-sided die" sounds crass
@MikeEdenfield we read chicken entrails, duh.
without dredging up uncomfortable recent events.. we had 5 when 2015 started... we have 4 now... we're electing 2.
does that mean that there would have been 1 position open this year regardless?
Math is uncomfortable. Quit it.
pretty sure site got a little bit bigger since this time last year
2:21 AM
well star wars came out, so...
I mean, there's gotta be at least 30 questions about Kylo Ren
that's like a full-time moderator job right there
1 question and 29 duplicates.
Q. Why did Kylo Ren [spoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoiler]?
VTC: Dupe of "How come Kylo Ren [spoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoilerspoiler]?
@MikeEdenfield The usual answer to 'how does this?' is 'the mods (and maybe CMs) discuss in private'.
I figured that but are there, e.g. expected metrics on how fast things get done?
like when I worked at BK and they had that stupid clock hanging over drive-thru?
@MikeEdenfield I suppose we could bring that into it, since those numbers are available, but it's mostly a feeling for how busy the mods are. That things like how many flags/day there are and how quickly we handle flags are measureable doesn't mean we need to use them to gauge our mod needs.
2:27 AM
@Shog9 BTW: the "Candidate Q&A" question is missing the actual date that the submissions close...
> - During the nomination phase, (so, until <DATE> at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 3:00 pm EST on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure),
<DATE> is 7 days from today? so.. since I clearly can't do math well, the 25th? is that right?
@MikeEdenfield Oh I see, you need to edit it to see the hidden '<DATE>' in the rendered markdown.
it's actually yelling at me for the unclosed HTML tag right now :)
@MikeEdenfield corrected
@MikeEdenfield those do exist, but mostly as a "how are we doing" thing for the mods themselves; if they get scary-bad, we'll take a look, but usually we just ask the mod team itself if they need an election before things degrade that much.
2:30 AM
so basically, Keen couldn't hack it.
@MikeEdenfield Well, that's a given.
i just want to know... do you have a company bathroom? With one of those dudes that holds the towels?
@MikeEdenfield why do you think they need someone new?
That's Keen too. I really don't know how he does it all.
2:37 AM
FNG is always the towel guy
On a more serious note, I think a few people expressed the sentiment that, were the team a bit less burdened, they could be doing more community outreach. Being more fences on the cliff so's to avoid needing quite so many ambulance drivers in the valley.
2:49 AM
that... was a very stretched metaphor
Obie don't grok election comments :(
link doesnt work
oh. weird. just a hiccup
i was gonna say.
probably my stupid vpn
forgot i was on it
1 hour later…
4:18 AM
Good job @Mike. Knew you'd step up one of these days!
@phantom42 How are you mate?
2 hours later…
6:03 AM
@MikeEdenfield i still didn't :/
Anyways nice to see your name there.
1 hour later…
7:26 AM
@phantom42 Nominate yourself please.
4 hours later…
11:54 AM
Why should I? Without your vote, not only will my life be devoid of meaning, I'll also never win.
@phantom42 LOL. No, I'll vote you and that's why I am pushing you for nomination.
5 hours later…
5:29 PM
man I feel like I'm writing a college application with all these questions.
i dont think you need to be answering yet
iirc, the top questions are collated into a new post that you answer next week
@phantom42 I know. I'm just doing my homework.
2 hours later…
7:34 PM
the comments on my nomination went in exactly the direction I was hoping they wouldn't go.
isn't it just SS-3 being weird about stuff?
holy crap. still?
> @SS-3 If you want us to judge for ourselves, give us the links and details required to make a good objective judgement. Right now, you're coming across as the angry one, and Mike is being, to his credit, very diplomatic. – ArtOfCode 1 hour ago
I really wouldn't worry
I have no problem with anyone expressing their opinion on my nomination -- that's what the comments are for. These are devolving into another rehash of that same meta argument, totally apart from the election.
7:49 PM
normally I'd flag such comments for moderator cleanup due to irrelevance
I don't think those comments are irrelevant to the election.
they're not necessarily irrelevant, i just think that that post isn't the correct venue for that discussion
they put way too much focus on a specific issue that has been discussed to death on meta already; just one comment linking to the old meta post would be sufficient to make the relevant point
the dozen or so comments that came in response would be better off moved to meta or chat
sadly, if anyone else has a relevant point to make about his nomination, they basically can't do it in those comments anymore since no one but us is going to read that far down
though maybe this chatroom is the better place for that anyway
8:42 PM
@SS-3 It's true, one person's negative experience with a nominee is not something that should be hidden. Consider though, that there are thousands of users on this site, and the bulk of the comments on @Mike's election revolve around you. Is that fair to him?
@SS-3 I tend to agree with @phantom42 here. One comment laying out your concerns with a nominee is absolutely appropriate, but a string of comments including obscure references to events that readers may not even be aware of is something else.
A skeptical observer might even suspect you were trying to shout down any other opinions but your own.
For this reason, I'm cleaning up the comment thread there. You'll be allowed one comment; if you wish to discuss anything with Mike or other nominees, you can bring it up here.
@Shog9 You forgot to put a "y'all" in there somewhere.
y'all so meta
9:08 PM
@Shog9 I originally posted only one comment. Others were just replies. Also, why didn't you move those comments in chat here with a link to conversation there? That conversation had my appeal to voters.
@SS-3 there's no facility for moving election nomination comments to chat (not that they'd make a lot of sense without context anyway). If you wanted them in chat, you could've posted them here to start with.
Anyway, I edited Keen's link to the bifrost discussion into your original comment, which provides most of the context added by later commentary. I think that will suffice as a record of your concerns.
@Shog9 Okay.
yep, looks much better now
and oh look, now someone else was able to post a different question for Mike
9:47 PM
@Shog9 I posted a new comment. Merge it with my first comment if you wish.
Did... You seriously post a Google doc
oh god, I have to see this
well, as long as it doesn't start another comment debate
ok, look... We get it. You don't think Mike would make a good mod. You have a comment in which you said that. Let other people comment too now.
If you wanna discuss it further - that is, have a conversation about it, a thing involving multiple willing participants - then chat's the place.
Otherwise, having said your piece, have the grace to move on.
9:57 PM
@Shog9 Why did you remove that comment? My first comment isn't a complete appeal. Also, I have updated the doc to include about conversation in chat room.
Nominations are not your soapbox, @SS-3. You can provide questions to or commentary on the nominees, but you can't just sit there and expound on your philosophy of life and why Mike sucks eggs.
You brought in the whole Bifrost thing in your first comment. If other folks don't think it's the problem you believe it to be, then you gotta live with that, not sit there and argue with them or write up some Bifrost Morality Manifesto to try & convince 'em. The story's all there, on meta, linked to from your comment: trust folks to make up their own minds.
@Shog9 That meta post is not dealing with morality issues. But, on election page, I put weight on morality issue. That's why I am concerned. Nothing more.
@SS-3 So write another meta post. Or edit your existing meta post. Or talk about it in chat. ALL of these scale more effectively than a single comment thread; you cannot easily monopolize them and force others to be silent, but if your only goal is to be heard they'll serve as well as anything.
@Shog9 Okay. Thanks.
10:35 PM
I don't really like eggs. For the record.
It doesn't matter. Mike sucks eggs is a tautology.
@randal'thor LOL for your comment on @Himarm's nomination.
Mike is running an anti-egg campaign. Gotta spin it, gotta spin it.
SS-3's avatar is egg-shaped. Coincidence?
10:53 PM
well, now that you called my attention to it...
14 messages moved to Mos Eisley

« first day    last day (25 days later) »