glad you're taking the time to read this as it also took me some time to write it.
dot_Sp0T, and.. according to the date on my profile I joined to site in November 2014 - which should be somewhen around the start of the public beta I think. And, as you can see, I stayed (for better or worse).
I still enjoy being a regular on this site and part of its community, and continuously find myself reveling in the worlds some questions hint at (can I use 'reveling' in this context?).
If you're wondering whether I've been up for the mod-vote before or not, I have not. So far I have never found myself in a position with the luxury of enough time for regular duties on the site (be it moderation, or otherwise). While still being tight on time some weeks, I've learned to manage myself and my private & work lives much better while growing older - giving me more confidence in claiming that I've got the time and mind for the job at hand.
In case you haven't yet, please check out this excellent blurb where I am rambling about my low rep-score and find excuses for my abysmal number of moderation badges.
While I will now proceed to answer the questionnaire, please feel free to point additional questions at me either in the comments, or over at the chat.
- As a moderator, you'll have to deal with some of the worst content on the site, clean up after users, remain patient in the face of conflict, be subjected to abuse without lashing out . . . you get the idea. Often, moderating can be stressful and not a lot of fun. We're benevolent janitors, not benevolent dictators. Given the job description, why do you (still) want to be a moderator?
Wish not, want not (I think this is a saying?). I do not, for reasons of myself need to become a mod on this site. But when the subject of a new election came up, someone on the chat pinged me to ask if I would nominate - telling me that they thought I'd make a useful mod. And that is enough for me, I guess.
Stress is a matter of how you handle it and what coping mechanisms you put in place. As a normal user I am not as strongly judged as a mod, and I admit that so far I used this to allow myself showing some emotion in a debate. As a mod I will just have to refrain from doing so openly - like learning to set aside money for taxes and medical bills.
Conflict tends to be a sign of misunderstanding between two or more parties. And where there's misunderstanding, there's a chance for trying to clear it up. I enjoy putting myself into a person's point of view and trying to understand their points and arguments. I genuinely believe that the people that actively wish to anger and hurt others are a minority, and most simply do not understand that they hurt or anger.
- Good Subjective, Bad Subjective describes what makes a good subjective question -- it inspires longer answers explaining "why" and "how", it encourages answers that are backed up by facts and references, and it's more than mindless social fun. Worldbuilding gets a lot of questions in the gray area here. Some of them get closed as primarily opinion-based or too broad, others are left open and attract 10+ answers, and members of the community are confused about which precedents to follow. As a moderator with a binding close (or reopen!) vote, as well as the usual abilities to edit and comment, how will you handle questions like these, and their answers?
When a question goes into the area of Bad Subjective I will put it on-hold without remorse. But I will also try explaining to the querist Why it was put on-hold, what it being put on-hold means, and how we can get it back into the loop - together, as a community.
Questions being too open, broad, lax don't only hurt the site in the long-term. They also, more importantly, don't really help the querist in resolving the issue that made them come to us for help.
Making them understand, and show them, the value of asking multiple concise questions, rather than a big and open one seems the right path here - in my opinion.
- It's a pretty important topic, and one that is being discussed a lot right now: Where do you draw the line as to whether real world questions are on-topic?
For me personally every question is on topic here, as long as it is about resolving a problem encountered when building worlds. No matter how straight-forward or exotic said problem is.
A problem is defined by an initial situation, a goal that wants to be achieved, and optionally thoughts and notes on what has been already tried, thought on - that did not deliver desired results.
Any question that is purely a matter of research, e.g. asking about population data in the medieval ages, is better suited to be asked on another, more specific, stack. There are research questions that are a good fit for this site, but they are in my opinion a minority.
YET, when becoming a mod, this doesn't really matter - does it? It will not be about what my stance, as a person is. In the capacity as a mod, my stance on this subject will be whatever the consensus on the moderator team & the worldbuilding stack is.
- How will your attitude towards close/reopen voting change now that your close/reopen votes are binding?
I do not see my attitude changing all that much. Currently I tend to close/reopen questions after examining them (and this examining happening most often when lurking the review queues).
I will certainly more seldom cast a first close-vote though.
- How would you handle a user whose attitude is "I am surely right, it's the entire site to be wrong"?
As long as they do not do anything that goes against the rules of the stack I do not see any reason to handle them. It's their prerogative to have their own opinion, no matter how wrong it might be.
If they start breaking the rules, harassing other users, and whatnot, then I will step up and try making them understand. If they continue, there are procedures such as temporary bans and what-not that can be used to cool a situation down and give both parties time to reflect on the situation.
- 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?
As above, it is their prerogative. If they go against site policies such as Be Nice, then there are detailed steps to be taken, e.g. a temporary ban or similar.
It doesn't matter how great their questions/answers are, the rules & policies are here to make the stack an enjoyable experience for all of us.
Many people with great knowledge are eccentrics or similar, if they can't learn to get along with others then they should rather write a book than participating in a community.
- How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
I would seek discourse with them, in order to understand their reasons. Maybe the exchange will produce a new view for both of us, it might result in the action being reverted, or might not.
But I will not go against their decision if they are fully confident that it was the right course of action. They were elected by the community just as much as I would be in that situation - I am neither better, nor worse suited to make the call they made.
- A genie appears and grants you one wish related to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange. You can change one aspect of the site. It could be something about the community (people post more questions, people post higher-quality answers, people deal with review queues quicker, …), about moderators (they start closing more/fewer questions, …), about the way the site works (some feature request gets fulfilled), etc. The genie adds, “no funny business about what ‘one aspect’ means!”. What do you wish for?
As some might already be aware, I would wish for there being a grace-period on questions before people can start answering them. So querists, especially new users, get a change to receive feedback on their question and have time to fix issues that might otherwise lead to the question's answers going into another direction than they expected/intended.
The sandbox is a beautiful place and works amazingly well, but it is hidden behind a whole other stack (the worldbuilding meta) - which is not immediately known to new users, and often even unbeknownst to regulars.
- What time period are you typically most active during, and how often are you active during that period?
I live in Switzerland, the heart of Europe - so I'm mostly online during European business hours and into the late evening, so spottily between ~0800UTC to ~1600UTC and more actively ~1800UTC to ~2200CET.
As you see this is quite a range of time. That is because I've almost always got two browser tabs for WB open on any computer, one for the chat and another for the mainsite.
So, while currently being more reactive than active during the day, if necessary for moderator work I could and would reserve a fix slot for activity in the latter time-range.
- If you could add, rewrite, or delete, one thing from the Help Center, what would that be?
I guess I would like to see the sandbox linked on the tour, and have an informative paragraph added about it and the use of working on a question together before throwing it into a sea of help-vampires.