-3

I recently attempted to participate in the moderator election, despite my rather thin record on the site. I now understand that it is a more serious position than I initially thought- I happened to enter the election early before many high-rep and/or serious candidates entered and thus did not fully appreciate that I might be under-qualified.

As such, I incorrectly interpreted some comments as hostile which I now realize were merely meant to provide opportunities for me to express my dedication and willingness to be a moderator. In any case, I have withdrawn with my apologies for my candidacy's apparent lack of seriousness.

However, it seems to me that this episode could have been avoided if the link advertising the moderator election were not displayed (or at least not as prominently) if my activity is below a certain level. After all, it's activity as much as reputation that should determine who would make a good moderator.

I am not advocating that low-activity users cannot enter, merely that they would have to work a little harder to find the link. Of course, once nominations are closed, add the link for everyone that can vote - I believe that process already works quite well.

  • 1
    No questions were meant to suggest anything -- they were given as opportunities to express your willingness and dedication. – Tango Jan 30 '12 at 18:24
  • @TangoOversway I have no reason to doubt your honesty :) I'll edit my question. – Frank Pierce Jan 30 '12 at 18:33
  • How would you propose to determine what low-activity is? Low reputation? Low number of days seen versus length of membership? A combination of the two? Or something else entirely? – Xantec Jan 30 '12 at 18:35
  • @Xantec: My thought would be that it'd be rep compared to length of membership. – Tango Jan 30 '12 at 18:35
  • @Xantec: I am not familiar with the algorithm to determine activity on the User page, but perhaps that could be leveraged. Perhaps a specific percent? Just an idea. – Frank Pierce Jan 30 '12 at 18:39
7

The link isn't visible just to encourage nominations, but to also encourage other members of the site to see the nominations, read what the candidates have posted, and start asking questions.

There is no reason to prohibit new members from seeing the election page (also keep in mind that as designed, the nominations are only one sub-section of the overall page), and in all honesty there's no reason to prohibit or even discourage new members from nominating themselves, either.

True, not everyone is going to appreciate just what is involved with, or expected of, our moderators, but that doesn't mean that they would be bad moderators. At worst, it could provide very useful insight into what is expected, both for those who are thinking of participating in the election, and those who merely want to see what it is all about.

I'm sorry that you feel your nomination ended up poorly, and I hope that you hold no hard feelings about the comments and discussion on your nomination, but I think the end result is that you have a better understanding of what is involved in the election than you did before, and certainly it is better than what you would understand of the election if you didn't even have the opportunity to see the link in the first place.

  • I certainly have no hard feelings :) To be clear, I am not suggesting that new members shouldn't see the page - just that the link not be made so prominent until after the nomination period has ended. – Frank Pierce Jan 30 '12 at 18:37
  • 4
    @FrankPierce For people who are running, but are unable to make the Town Hall chat, the nomination phase is the only time for the community to interact with them. This interaction should be encouraged. At least, that's my understanding; this is my first election, so I'm uncertain on what the next phases will look like. – user1027 Jan 30 '12 at 19:04
  • You can interact in meta as well, but indeed the comments are meant to be used to query the nominees. There wasn't a lot of this, but they are still visible if you go to the nominations tab. The elections page would be better if it explicitly encouraged this (although it doesn't help with last-minute candidates). – Tony Meyer Jan 30 '12 at 20:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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