17
$\begingroup$

I'm sort of modeling this post after Aaron Maroja's 2014 meta post posted prior to the last moderator election, held in 2014. (So his post inspired this post.)

I think that some of the best leaders, and so too, moderators, emerge from among those who have been nominated by (a) peer(s), and only then, accept the nomination, and put themselves out there as a candidate. Nominating another user is also an opportunity to give note to a user whom you believe is great "mod material", whether or not that user accepts the nomination.

I have timed this post to provide a window of time, before the first day at which nominees must add their name as a candidate on October 2, 2017, for nominees to seriously consider whether to accept, decline, or ignore (all responses are valid). By accepting a nomination, you are indicating you will enter yourself as a candidate on Oct 2, 2017 (or very shortly after).

I ask that all self-nominees refrain from posting here. All candidates will have that opportunity to self-nominate on Monday, Oct. 2, 2017.

If you want to nominate another user, please do so in a new "answer field" below.

Please refrain from one-sentence gut reactions, but try to provide a bit of thought and context to explain "what makes this user that you're nominating worth endorsing in an election?" Your post doesn't need to be any formal essay. Again, this is an opportunity to toot the horn for exemplar users who are reluctant to toot their own horn.

Realize (as I've indicated) that any user you nominate has the option to accept or decline, or to simply ignore. Even if declined or ignored, it won't go unnoticed.

My hope, in this respect, is to widen the pool of qualified users who need to announce candidacy on Monday OCT. 2.

$\endgroup$
  • 21
    $\begingroup$ I'd like to ask in advance not to be nominated. Thank you. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Sep 28 '17 at 19:33
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm tempted to re-post this, but I'm sure Martin will think about it anyway. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Sep 30 '17 at 14:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DanielFischer incidentally amWhy approached him in chat about it. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 30 '17 at 15:58
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DanielFischer I'm hoping that folks would scroll through the 2014 nominations, and honor Martin's very gracious statement which struck me as pretty clear (No thank you then, and no thank you now, in terms of not wanting to be nominated.) $\endgroup$ – Namaste Sep 30 '17 at 16:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @amwhy can I nominate you? $\endgroup$ – Vidyanshu Mishra Oct 2 '17 at 19:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @VidyanshuMishra No. I mean I'd very much prefer you not to do so. But thanks for asking. $\endgroup$ – Namaste Oct 2 '17 at 19:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ So, you have no plans of being a moderator or you don't want to be nominated by me :-P $\endgroup$ – Vidyanshu Mishra Oct 2 '17 at 19:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @VidyanshuMishra I'm sorry I was unclear. I have absolutely no plans to run as a moderator; I should have said I'd prefer that no one nominates me. $\endgroup$ – Namaste Oct 2 '17 at 19:53
  • $\begingroup$ Well, that makes some sense. :) $\endgroup$ – Vidyanshu Mishra Oct 2 '17 at 19:55
  • $\begingroup$ @amWhy that's too bad. I think you would do a great job. $\endgroup$ – Ivo Terek Oct 2 '17 at 20:41
29
$\begingroup$

Accepted nomination.


Well, I'll jump at the opportunity to nominate, specifically

as a candidate in the upcoming 2017 election. I've been waiting for this opportunity to do so.

quid has, over time, been a very active member of mathematics.se and also on meta.mathematics.SE. Quid has also regularly stopped in to the mod office chat, and other math chat rooms, and is very generous with their knowledge of SE, and of this site, so helpful that I've seen more than a few users in chat or on meta.math that assume (rightfully so) that quid is a moderator of this site.

I have never encountered anyone on SE who shares quid's depth of knowledge, range of application, and rare interpersonal skills that dissolve tension, animosity, and defensive reactions in others and between others, through listening and rephrasing what is heard, e.g.

quid has also had plenty of background experience in terms of knowing and bearing the work entailed by a moderator. quid is currently a moderator on matheducators.se, and has contributed significant (time and effort) at MSE, even while working and moderating another site. So quid is pretty dedicated to the responsibilities they take on.

Please explore for yourself any of the great meta answer's quid has provided, their answers on main, and note in comments the measured and sincere voice of quid, and some of the bridges they helped build between users who clash.

I am hoping against hope that quid will accept this nomination.

$\endgroup$
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ Thank you for this very kind nomination. I imagine moderating this site to be a very interesting challenge, and will explore the idea to run in the election over the next days. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 29 '17 at 17:40
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Then there's currently three mods anonymous. You're simply bullying in these comments. Perhaps you're still sore that you had no choice but to end your moderatorship? But, you've given no examples, no evidence, nothing objective in your bullying. If you are sincere about asking about one or two particular incident, than do so. But you are making unsubstantiated claims in an attempt to trash a possible candidate? Why not wait until your behavior is more visible, if and when quid decides to run. The fact that you seem completely ignorant of some users need for anonymity, explains that need. $\endgroup$ – Namaste Sep 30 '17 at 20:40
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @BillDubuque that's fine and as I said on MO then "I do understand this to some extent" (re concern on the pseudonym). I think there is still a qualitative difference regarding this specific aspect between MO and this site (or other SE sites, for that matter), in that MO officially strongly encourages real names. Either way, there are plenty of pseudonymous mods on SE (incidentally including me) and this point was debated in detail in earlier elections. I do not plan to continue the discussion right here. But I'm looking forward to your constructive contributions to the electoral process. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 30 '17 at 21:07
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @BillDubuque to me the difference is clearly there, it is: I consider it as an impossibility for a moderator to be in permanent contradiction with a relatively prominent part of official policy recommendations (this goes for other recommendations too). MO has a policy to strongly encourage real names, this is not the case on this site (or SE more generally). This is the qualitative difference in my mind. One may see this differently, but this is what I meant. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 30 '17 at 21:35
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I agree that moderators should be moderate, and believing one's actions are "middle-of-the-road" is still only a belief and should not be given the power to enforce it. But the objections based on "anonymity" are suspicious. Stack Exchange is (rightly so) very popular, and it's more than likely colleagues (and, still worse, bosses) are reading this. $\endgroup$ – Professor Vector Sep 30 '17 at 21:52
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ @Bill Dubuque What is this obsession with anonymity? Are you sure "Bill Dubuque" makes you less anonymous than "quid" to the about 7 billions out there? $\endgroup$ – Professor Vector Sep 30 '17 at 22:08
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Did any of the existing/previous moderators gives a proof that they use the real name? For example, did they connect their MSE account to their professional website/ university? If they did not, I see no reason to ask for "real name" when one does not require a formal proof. @BillDubuque $\endgroup$ – user99914 Sep 30 '17 at 22:08
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @John: I can witness that at least two moderators are using their real name. I had a few beers with them. Enough that any real names would have come out. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Sep 30 '17 at 22:25
  • 15
    $\begingroup$ @BillDubuque : Indeed, I am not around in MSE long enough to relate quid's comment to their anonymity. Indeed, I never care about the names. After all, there are users in MSE who seems to use real names and are way more annoying. $\endgroup$ – user99914 Sep 30 '17 at 23:22
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @BillDubuque I agree that the debate might be premature. I still would like to clarify what I believe to be a misunderstanding. The fact that sometimes I may be perceived as "unnecessarily argumentative" is not due to me using or abusing a pseudonym. I know this since I was told about the same by some office-mates, among others. $\endgroup$ – quid Sep 30 '17 at 23:23
  • 11
    $\begingroup$ Anonymity could become a problem if it were used to hide from the consequences of what a person says. But I don't recall quid ever doing anything approaching that. On the contrary, quid A) is generously sharing what they know about how the site works with all askers. B) when quid disagrees with my actions they argue constructively and basically seek to "keep me honest". I like to think Bill also seeks to keep me honest, but it is admittedly a bit more taxing to see that from his colorful rhetoric. Ideally a moderator would not need such guidance, but I'm a bit too emotional to do without. $\endgroup$ – Jyrki Lahtonen Oct 1 '17 at 6:36
  • 14
    $\begingroup$ Anyway, @quid, you certainly make a worthy candidate. If you choose to run, I wish you the best of luck. If you choose not to run, then I hope you still find the energy to continue helping the site. $\endgroup$ – Jyrki Lahtonen Oct 1 '17 at 6:46
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ I don't want this to drift away from the purpose of this post. I am also deleting some off-topic comments. Don't stray needlessly off topic. $\endgroup$ – davidlowryduda Oct 1 '17 at 17:46
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I second this. I do not always agree with @quid, but I think he would be excellent at moderating. $\endgroup$ – Ron Gordon Oct 2 '17 at 20:42
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Thank you to everybody for the feedback. I decided to run. My nomination is up. $\endgroup$ – quid Oct 2 '17 at 20:50
9
$\begingroup$

It is a pleasure to propose Martin Sleziak (please take a look at his self-description and at his MSE participation statistics). 3 years ago, he declined the nomination citing lack of time, but he left the door open for future elections. In case he managed to free himself from his various daily duties (academic or not), I believe that he would make for an excellent moderator for the following reason (listed in no peculiar order):

  • he seems to have the type of personality that avoids conflicts and calms down the existing ones
  • he is very active on both MSE and MO (and I am not talking about the mathematical activity, but about curating these sites): a tireless retagger, editor and voter
  • he is a very experienced user by now, having been on MSE for 6,5 years (and having collected >40k reputation points)
  • he is very active on Meta, which might not be necessary but which surely is a plus for the job of a moderator
  • he seems to have an amazing memory, always remembering when a subject was already discussed on Meta several years ago, always finding duplicates on MSE
  • very importantly, he seems to enjoy doing all the above.

I believe that Martin Sleziak has the best "raw material" for becoming a moderator, but he seems to suffer a bit from lack of self-confidence regarding this job (the lack of social skills would not be a problem, since he could very well focus on other aspects of curating the site, leaving direct human interaction to the other members of the moderating team). Ladies and gentlemen, a big round of applause to help him get over this unjustified stage fright!

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @MartinSleziak, we're talking about you here. $\endgroup$ – Alex M. Oct 2 '17 at 16:12
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ I do support this, but be aware of Martin's statement from 2014: In the future, when moderator elections come again, I will think about it and decide for myself. ... There is no need to make a post like this in the future $\endgroup$ – Joffan Oct 2 '17 at 16:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Joffan: I missed that last line. Leaving my post here, instead of deleting it, will probably not annoy Martin Sleziak. $\endgroup$ – Alex M. Oct 2 '17 at 16:52
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Oh yeah, things can change in 3 years for sure. $\endgroup$ – Joffan Oct 2 '17 at 16:57
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ @AlexM. Thanks for your confidence in me. However, what I wrote in the post you linked still stands. Even if I considered running this time, I would not be able to do it because I would have difficulties to find the time. $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Oct 2 '17 at 16:58
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It's up to you whether you keep the post here or not - but it's rather redundant, since I will definitely not run. (I should probably have said that quite clearly at least in the election chat room or in a comment as Asaf did.) $\endgroup$ – Martin Sleziak Oct 2 '17 at 16:58
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ That's a pitty @Martin, since I continue to think you'd make an excellent mod. $\endgroup$ – quid Oct 2 '17 at 17:03
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ What @quid said, but without the typo in the word "pity". :P $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Oct 2 '17 at 17:49
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @quid: Tell the truth now, you're only running for moderator so you can edit that comment, aren't you? :D $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Oct 2 '17 at 20:56
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Asaf there you saw through my plot. Oh well. :-) $\endgroup$ – quid Oct 2 '17 at 20:59
  • $\begingroup$ @quid Ahem. I believe its about time to make that edit. :-) $\endgroup$ – Simply Beautiful Art Oct 19 '17 at 12:18
  • $\begingroup$ @SimplyBeautifulArt but, but the super-secret plot got busted; there's no point to it anymore! :-) $\endgroup$ – quid Oct 19 '17 at 13:42
  • $\begingroup$ D= I guess so! @quid $\endgroup$ – Simply Beautiful Art Oct 19 '17 at 14:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .