Who should our moderators be?

Question

This is one of the "real" essential questions of every [public] beta:

1. Who should the moderators be?

Moderators in Stack Exchange perform dual roles. Beside the normal activities of a Moderator, part of their function is to act as liaison — a role which links the Stack Exchange team with the individual communities. Discussing the criteria of a great moderator is important and picking out potential candidates is a great way to introduce outstanding contributors to your community. Stack Exchange is completely open to appointing temporary Moderators when someone’s contribution makes them a standout choice for your community’s human exception handler. If your meta site does not have a post to nominate Moderators, start one now! Pro Tem appointments will begin about two weeks after the site goes public. The more guidance the Community Team receives, the more informed is their choice.

For more information about what the pro tempore moderators do, see the blog post Moderator Pro Tempore.

---

This question will serve as a "nomination" thread (but keep in mind that the community managers have the final say). If you wish to nominate a user (including yourself) for the position of pro tempore moderator, please obey the following guidelines [adapted from meta.datascience]:

• Each nomination should be a separate answer. Link to the user’s profile (main site and meta) so we can see their activity.
• The nominee should indicate their acceptance in a comment, stating that they accept the nomination. Optionally, the nominee can also write something about themselves in the comments.
• Self nominations are okay, and even encouraged. Most sites have not had sufficient time for many users to stand out. Self nomination is simply a way to say, “I’m interested. Let my record speak for itself.” Links to other activities may be helpful: Area 51 participation, participation in other sites, blog posts reviewing or announcing the site, etc.

We're looking for members of this site who:

• Have a reasonably high reputation score to indicate active, consistent participation.
• Show an interest in their meta’s community-building activities.
• Lead by example, showing patience and respect for their fellow community members in everything they write.
• Exhibit those intangible traits discussed in A Theory of Moderation.

It's also good if the moderators:

• Participated in Area 51, generate social network referrals, or blog about the site.
• Are members who have already shown an interest or ability to promote their community.

---

For the moderator announcement, see: Moderators Pro Tempore announcement

Answer 1

I nominate yuttadhammo (main, meta). yuttadhammo clearly has tremendous domain knowledge (>1500 rep, to say nothing of his demonstrated knowledge outside of the SE network, e.g. on YouTube and his blog), and has also spent quite some time keeping the site shipshape (84 reviews and 17 edits as of this writing).

(Note: yuttadhammo and I don't have some sort of mutual back-scratching agreement going here; I was going to post this answer along with the question but ran short on time.)

Answer 2

I nominate @senshin, of course :) who better?

https://buddhism.meta.stackexchange.com/users/28/senshin https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/users/28/senshin

Answer 3

I will self-nominate (meta, main). I've been moderating or administrating internet forums for a long time and have experience as a SE moderator pro tempore on MA.SE (meta, main), so I've seen a good number of the sorts of curveballs that a mod could expect.

It hasn't been publicly outside of my twitter, but I've also been pushing this site on social networks among friends who I think would be interested.

Answer 4

I nominate zvolkov (meta, main) as a knowledgeable candidate for moderation. Second highest reputation based on Area 51 info on Buddhism.SE.

Answer 5

I hope that whoever moderates will reside in The Four Noble Abodes:

• Compassion
• Loving Kindness
• Empathetic Joy
• Equanimity

My belief is that we have to walk the talk, even in SE. ;-)

Answer 6

General advice - I highly suggest moderators act with as light a touch as possible. The general idea is that this site is moderated by community consensus and it is the duty of moderators to build and maintain a consensus.

It is always better if moderators build community by encourging the sorts of behavior you wish to see from your community.

Examples -

1) Asking for clarification after a down vote.

2) Asking quality comments be converted to answers.

3) Asking quality comments be edited into answers to improve the quality.

4) Editing (and commenting) questions / answers as an example to the community.

5) Participating on meta.

6) Unless there is spam or grossly inappropriate content, allow, no encourage the community to police their own.

7) Patiently explain your reasoning for moderation, ask the community for feedback, and be willing to change your methods if others have suggestions or the consensus changes.

Such a method builds the community without "abuse of power". The more you support the community, and the more you build your community, the more your community will grow.

Answer 7

I also nominate FullPeace.org as for reasons above.

Answer 8

I would like to nominate "Kevin Johnsrude".

Kevin for his attitude for how this should be done in Buddhism and FullPeace.org perhpas as a praticiner (as per profile)

Also Vipassana / Meditation practitioners on the site also should be encouraged to take this role up (or assist as time permits) as they can bridge the gap between theory and practice as Buddhism is very much practical than being a philosophy or a dogmatic religion. Also this should not diminish the opportunity to any body who does not do Vipassana / Meditation. We should try to attract the practitioners more as the site can benefit from their experience.