Who should our (new) pro-tem moderators be?

Question

This question will serve as a nomination thread in our search for a complete team of three active moderators, as discussed in this meta thread. If you wish to nominate a user (including yourself) for the position of pro tempore moderator, please obey the following guidelines:

• Each nomination should be a separate answer containing links to the nominee's main and meta profiles.
• Self-nominations are encouraged.
• If nominated by someone else, the nominee should indicate their acceptance in a comment. Optionally, the nominee can write something about themselves and their desire to moderate in the comments as well.

We're looking for members of this site who:

• Have a reasonably high reputation score to indicate active, consistent participation.
• Have experience voting, reviewing, and doing other moderation activities.
• 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.

The Community Team will select your new pro tems based on the feedback and input on candidates here, but it won't be purely voting-based - so if you support a candidate, be sure to let us know why in the comments.

This thread will be open for one week.

Answer 1

Could I put myself forward please. I've found myself really wanting the site to be a great resource for Buddhism and also a welcoming place for new and old. I'd like to help maintain and support it and all that use it.

Main profile

Meta profile

Answer 2

I'm nominating myself as probably the only original moderator still kicking around. I'm somewhat ambivalent about the idea, but it seems reasonable that having at least one of the original moderators on the team could be a good thing.

I've been accused a couple of times of being a bad moderator, but I don't feel that the accusations were valid. I was also absent for a few months, so don't have the best attendance track record.

I've been the only really active mod for the past two months, so the site regulars know whether I'm suitable or not to continue. I am committed to staying active (no more long trips to Asia in the works) for at least the next year if re-elected.

On the other hand, if there are three keen and qualified candidates looking to take the reins, then I'm happy to step aside.

Main profile

Meta profile

Answer 3

I'd like to nominate @ChrisW

Main profile

Meta profile

---

I accept (because I did say I would be willing to to step up as a moderator).

I have seen other StackExchange sites while they were in 'beta', and how people use 'meta' to discuss site policy: hopefully that's useful.

I think the theory is that the function of moderators is to implement site-specific policies which users (the 'community') vote for meta.

I have not ever been a moderator, myself, in the past. I could be just as happy if the site had any of several other people as moderators; but somebody should and I can see why I am nominated.

I have participated, here on meta; hopefully my posts have clarified what my own opinions are.

I worried, that I do not know enough about the subject (i.e. Buddhism) to be a good moderator: that I would not know when or how to moderate (edit or delete) content (questions and answers).

So I created a meta-topic "Whether and how to moderate questions?" – and based on the input (comments and answers) from 3 or 4 other people there, I defined this answer:

• That answer currently says that most questions are allowed and should not be 'moderated'.
• If you agree, disagree, and/or want to question or change or support the site's policies then I hope you'll participate in decision making by posting and voting on meta.

The Theory of Moderation which abby referenced in the OP starts with:

But what do community moderators do? The short answer is, as little as possible!

On other sites I see dozens of like-minded, experienced users help to engage other people:

• Use comments to post polite questions or to add small details to other people's answers.
• Vote (up-vote) all useful answers. An up-vote helps to let other people know when their contribution is appreciated, encourages them to participate again in future, and helps other readers to identify all the more helpful answers.

Answer 4

I nominate Robin111:

• People think that she's really nice when she writes to them: which is all-important
• She writes rules clearly and carefully
• She's sensitive to the difficulties of editing other people's questions, to make them clearer, and has a track record of having done that successfully (the OP thanks her for the edit)
• Participates on meta (an essential qualification)
• And on the main site, more than 40 answers with an average of nearly 4 votes per answer
• Writes like someone who would be easy to work alongside, on a team of moderators

Main profile

Meta profile

Answer 5

I ask Andrei to continue if he's available:

• Knows Buddhism.SE since Area51

• Experienced as a moderator both on and off StackExchange:

  I've been moderating Google+ Zen Buddhism community for more than a year now and serving as one of the main answerers on Buddhism Q&A community on Google+. As a Google+ moderator I am known for my tolerance, ability to avoid conflicts, and straightforward head chopping action when it comes to breaking the rules. I'm a Stackoverflow user since 2009 with ~10k rep, and a Buddhist practitioner since 1995.

Main profile

Meta profile

Answer 6

I nominate Thiago:

• High reputation (in the top 12) on the main site
• Active with questions and answers on meta (so, interested in how this site is run)
• Clearly knowledgeable about Buddhism
• Patient and methodical: replies to my long questions with long answers
• Also one of the top voters (most votes cast) on the main site

Main profile

Meta profile