One topic I am seeing a lot of the elction page, and in meta threads, and in the site in general, is the idea that moderators should be running around slamming close votes on every question that doesn't fit into the sites definition.

When I became a moderator, it was made exceedingly clear to us as moderators that we should be *exception handlers*. That we are not meant to run around smashing things with hammers unless the community is unable to, or has failed to do so. This means giving the community a chance to do things before acting unilaterally.

I find the idea that moderators are meant to be taking the front line in closing questions concerning. This does not gel with what I was told a good moderator should be, and for me, fails the **moderate** part of the word moderator. We are here to keep the peace, not make policies and fight wars. Moderators should be here to handle issues that users can't handle themselves.

It particularly frustrates me when I am directly accused of not being a community leader, and not doing enough proactive moderation on the site. This is not what I feel a moderators job is. We are not asked to be community leaders. Leave this for the community. We are here to handle things that the wider community cannot handle.

Am I wrong in thinking this?