EEAA reporting in...
- 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. What do you think went wrong last year, and what would you do differently if put in the same situation?
The #1 thing that went wrong: communication. From both sides. SE was too heavy-handed in enacting actions with no prior warning nor communication. N00b could have (not should have) communicated better about his cleansing campaign.
My default when dealing with people is to not presume that they have bad motivations for doing whatever they're doing. I apply this not only to work interactions but also to how I interact with my wife as well as my two boys. Yes, by starting out from this perspective, I may get burned from time to time, but overall, things tend to just plain go better when you start from the assumption that people are acting in good faith.
Before taking any action and making any assumptions, SE staff should have communicated individually with HopelessN00b to see what was he was up to.
Additionally, accusations of lying were made by SE staff, and to my knowledge, were never substantiated nor apologized for. This was inappropriate. I hope that the SE Community team learned an important lesson through that experience. I'm certain that any future mods will also be more careful when undertaking similar actions. I know I will be.
- 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. 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?
Maintaining a reasonable set of tags is critical to the organization of questions on all SE sites. Serverfault is no exception. Looking through the list of tags that HopelessN00b wanted to burnitate, I agree with most of them. Many of the tags are either too broad or too narrow to be of any use.
- Do you agree with the statement "ServerFault needs professional-quality questions, not just questions from professionals"? What does the word "professional" mean to you, within the context of the phrase, "professional-quality questions"? Do you believe that in addition to professional-quality questions, ServerFault also needs professional-quality answers and comments? What are "professional quality questions" to you?
I 100% agree that SF needs "professional-quality" questions.
Professionalism means:
- Writing an easily-understood question. It is fine if English is not your primary language. However, if I have to read your question through four times to even being understanding what is it you're asking about, it's probably getting closed.
- Showing evidence that you've done some work on the issue yourself. As I mentioned in my nomination speech, we're not here to do your job for you. If it's clear that you're clueless about the topic at hand, are unwilling to provide details required to answer the question, or are asking for a handout, the question will be closed.
- Interacting with peers in a respectful manner. If a user shows disrespect, they'll be temp-banned. I won't tolerate it. This applies even to high-rep users. Systems Administrators are often lumped into a "jerk" category, and if my work with SF can sway that stereotype even just a little bit, I would call it a success.
- All of the above applies not only to questions, but also to all other interactions on the site.
- I'm drunk/not reading carefully/don't hang out here much. Why should I vote for you instead of some other person?
Maybe you should vote for me, maybe you should vote for one of many other immensely-qualified candidates that are in the election. Honestly, I'd love to be elected moderator, but if I don't get a diamond, I will gladly continue using the site as I have been, and will happily work alongside whomever is elected.
- What problems does Server Fault face that are unique to Server Fault?
Being a helpdesk. We get all manner of people here, from Joe business owner that can't figure out his Linksys router, to Jane web developer, who is having problems "connecting" her DNS to her shared GoDaddy account, and everything in between. At the moment, I don't have any concrete ideas on how to solve this, but it needs to be made more clear (I'm not even sure this is possible) that we are not a helpdesk. If your service provider/software vendor/ISP/hardware manufacturer has a support mechanism, it should be used first. Yes, even if you need to pay for the support.
- Briefly explain the role of a moderator, and what you plan to do to fill that role. What is awesome about your approach?
The role of a moderator is to make sure that site activity (both questions and answers) align with the site's mission and intended audience.
- How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
They would be temp-banned, and if the behavior continued, perma-banned. Let me explain. My views on this are heavily-influenced by a policy we have at my day job. We have a strict no-jerk policy. This applies not only to employees, but also to vendors, contractors, and even investors. We don't care if you're the most talented software dev in the world - if you're a jerk and are difficult to work with, we don't want to employ you.
This is how I view un-professional behavior on Server Fault. Sure, you may provide some positive value. That's great. The ramifications of your negative actions, though, far outweigh the positives and thus, for the good of the site, the user should be banned.
- How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
I'd speak individually to that mod to hear their rationale. As mentioned above, I always try and presume people are trying to put their best foot forward. In discussion with the other mod, I'd try and argue my reasons for why the question should have been left open. If I'm able to convince the other mod, we'll re-open it. If not, let it be. It's not worth the effort and hard feelings to turn it into a conflict.
