Return to Answer

I'd like to drag an elephant into this room (I'm sorry in advance), and see what people think now that some time has passed. Perhaps the amount of exposition is too much, and the subject aged. But I can't help but feel like it will color this years election whether we bring it up or not.

We had an election last year that ended with some parting and drama.
And I can't help but think of Ryan Ries` comment...

I don't know why anyone would want to be a moderator, now.

Let's be honest here, things went wrong after the last election.
Communication was a major issue, and there were some divisive opinions on what should or shouldn't have been done.

Last year, we voted on someone who was running on a platform of extreme, desperate measures, we voted for someone who put up the following campaign slogan:

A vote for me is a vote to put my cruelty and viciousness to work for the site, against the horde of stupidity that threatens it.

And while it definitely wasn't a landslide victory, talks of stupidity dealt with through cruelty did garner enough votes to win a second place.

So for our candidates:
Do you think the extreme rhetoric used last year is still viable today?
Would you consider picking up some of the work that helped win last year, and if so will you take a different approach?

What do you think went wrong last year, and what would you do differently if put in the same situation?

I'd like to drag an elephant into this room (I'm sorry in advance), and see what people think now that some time has passed. Perhaps the amount of exposition is too much, and the subject aged. But I can't help but feel like it will color this years election whether we bring it up or not.

We had an election last year that ended with some parting and drama.
And I can't help but think of Ryan Ries` comment...

I don't know why anyone would want to be a moderator, now.

Let's be honest here, things went wrong after the last election.
Communication was a major issue, and there were some divisive opinions on what should or shouldn't have been done.

Last year, we voted on someone who was running on a platform of extreme, desperate measures, we voted for someone who put up the following campaign slogan:

A vote for me is a vote to put my cruelty and viciousness to work for the site, against the horde of stupidity that threatens it.

And while it definitely wasn't a landslide victory, talks of stupidity dealt with through cruelty did garner enough votes to win a second place.

So for our candidates:
Do you think the extreme rhetoric used last year is still viable today?
Would you consider picking up some of the work that helped win last year, and if so will you take a different approach?

What do you think went wrong last year, and what would you do differently if put in the same situation?

I'd like to drag an elephant into this room (I'm sorry in advance), and see what people think now that some time has passed. Perhaps the amount of exposition is too much, and the subject aged. But I can't help but feel like it will color this years election whether we bring it up or not.

We had an election last year that ended with some parting and drama.
And I can't help but think of Ryan Ries` comment...

I don't know why anyone would want to be a moderator, now.

Let's be honest here, things went wrong after the last election.
Communication was a major issue, and there were some divisive opinions on what should or shouldn't have been done.

Last year, we voted on someone who was running on a platform of extreme, desperate measures, we voted for someone who put up the following campaign slogan:

A vote for me is a vote to put my cruelty and viciousness to work for the site, against the horde of stupidity that threatens it.

And while it definitely wasn't a landslide victory, talks of stupidity dealt with through cruelty did garner enough votes to win a second place.

So for our candidates:
Do you think the extreme rhetoric used last year is still viable today?
Would you consider picking up some of the work that helped win last year, and if so will you take a different approach?

What do you think went wrong last year, and what would you do differently if put in the same situation?

I'd like to drag an elephant into this room (I'm sorry in advance), and see what people think now that some time has passed. Perhaps the amount of exposition is too much, and the subject aged. But I can't help but feel like it will color this years election whether we bring it up or not.

We had an election last year that ended with some parting and drama.
And I can't help but think of Ryan Ries` comment...

I don't know why anyone would want to be a moderator, now.

Let's be honest here, things went wrong after the last election.
Communication was a major issue, and there were some divisive opinions on what should or shouldn't have been done.

Last year, we voted on someone who was running on a platform of extreme, desperate measures, we voted for someone who put up the following campaign slogan:

A vote for me is a vote to put my cruelty and viciousness to work for the site, against the horde of stupidity that threatens it.

And while it definitely wasn't a landslide victory, talks of stupidity dealt with through cruelty did garner enough votes to win a second place.

So for our candidates:
Do you think the extreme rhetoric used last year is still viable today?
Would you consider picking up some of the work that helped win last year, and if so will you take a different approach?

What do you think went wrong last year, and what would you do differently if put in the same situation?

I'd like to drag an elephant into this room (I'm sorry in advance), and see what people think now that some time has passed. Perhaps the amount of exposition is too much, and the subject aged. But I can't help but feel like it will color this years election whether we bring it up or not.

We had an election last year that ended with some parting and drama.
And I can't help but think of Ryan Ries` comment...

I don't know why anyone would want to be a moderator, now.

Let's be honest here, things went wrong after the last election.
Communication was a major issue, and there were some divisive opinions on what should or shouldn't have been done.

Last year, we voted on someone who was running on a platform of extreme, desperate measures, we voted for someone who put up the following campaign slogan:

A vote for me is a vote to put my cruelty and viciousness to work for the site, against the horde of stupidity that threatens it.

And while it definitely wasn't a landslide victory, talks of stupidity dealt with through cruelty did garner enough votes to win a second place.

So for our candidates:
Do you think the extreme rhetoric used last year is still viable today?
What do you think went wrong last year, and what would you do differently if put in the same situation?
Would you consider picking up some of what was dropped after last years drama? And if so, will you handle it differently?

I'd like to drag an elephant into this room (I'm sorry in advance), and see what people think now that some time has passed. Perhaps the amount of exposition is too much, and the subject aged. But I can't help but feel like it will color this years election whether we bring it up or not.

We had an election last year that ended with some parting and drama.
And I can't help but think of Ryan Ries` comment...

I don't know why anyone would want to be a moderator, now.

Let's be honest here, things went wrong after the last election.
Communication was a major issue, and there were some divisive opinions on what should or shouldn't have been done.

Last year, we voted on someone who was running on a platform of extreme, desperate measures, we voted for someone who put up the following campaign slogan:

A vote for me is a vote to put my cruelty and viciousness to work for the site, against the horde of stupidity that threatens it.

And while it definitely wasn't a landslide victory, talks of stupidity dealt with through cruelty did garner enough votes to win a second place.

So for our candidates:
Do you think the extreme rhetoric used last year is still viable today?
Would you consider picking up some of the work that helped win last year, and if so will you take a different approach?

What do you think went wrong last year, and what would you do differently if put in the same situation?