In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected [from an earlier thread]( have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. As noted, not every question was compiled - the top 8 voted questions were selected along with our default 2 questions for a total of 10 questions.

As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just [copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes]( consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.

Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.

Good luck to all of the candidates!

**Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.**

To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):


>1. **What do you think about the current moderation style with regard to closing and reopening questions?** We, the current mods, generally have a laid-back style in a few areas. While we won't hesitate to move long, unproductive comments to chat or delete spam on sight, we'll often let the community delete posts on its own, and we almost never mod-hammer a post closed or open. Do you agree with this method of dealing with closing and reopening questions, and if not, how do you think it can be improved? How would you, as a mod, work to change it?

>2. **How do you feel about the scope of World Building SE?** What if anything would you want to change about the site's scope? How would you go about ensuring community involvement in the conversation and decision of scope change?

>3. [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?

>4. **Why do you want to be a moderator?** Similarly to what Grace Note said, there are motives behind every action. It's important to distinguish if someone is in it for the title or if they have genuine intentions.

>5. 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?

>6. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?

>7. 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?

>8. What do you think the key traits of a moderator are, and how have you demonstrated them thus far in your activity on the site?

>9. **What are your qualifications?** i.e. Do you have previous moderating experience on SE or from somewhere else? What qualities make you suited for this position? Is there proof of your convictions on this site; can you show us examples of circumstances in which you helped, or could have helped?

>10. **How would a diamond change the way you discuss on Meta?** A lot on discussions on Meta require the finding of a "sweet spot" between extremes (mostly, the definition of some closing reasons). In those discussion, the voice of a moderator tends to have a higher influence than others. This is mostly a good thing: a moderator spends time thinking about it, has a lot of meta-experience and has been elected "because they're good at it". As a casual user though, I also find it intimidating as it always feels like the discussion is closed after one of our moderator has answered. How do you feel about it? Where would you position yourself between "discussion ender" and "casual dude"? How is it going to change your tone? (if it does at all)