1. 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?

First clean up the offending comments and if going on after communication with the other moderators a moderator message, followed by suspensions of increasing length.

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

Discuss it with fellow moderators. And if the community decides to vote for reopening and I feel strongly about it I might give a final re-open vote.

3. Do you expect your participation in the site to change in any way if you are elected. If so, how and why? If not, why not?

I expect to visit at least daily (up to now I was less regular) but do not expect to increase my answering by much as I already answer most questions in my field of cycling knowledge.

4. Given the relatively casual moderation traditionally used for this fairly small SE (e.g. letting certain minor infractions slide to help facilitate discussion and debate), how would you describe your moderation style, and would it align with or oppose this trend?

My moderation style alligns with this trend, I am more likely to leave a comment with a warning, convert non-answers with valuable information to comments but am strict in not leaving unfriendly and nasty content.

5. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?

I stand behind all I ever wrote and hope I do not have unrembered bad items. Having been a moderator before I joined Stack Exchange I have realized a long time ago that whatever you post on internet stays, forever in most cases.

6. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching enough reputation to access moderator tools or become a trusted user?

I gain reputation slowly due to my interests in cycling being different from the average on this site so reaching the levels needed to work the moderation queues takes very long. I am available as a moderator, and experienced as such, which will help the moderator team immediately.

1. 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?

It seems fairly straightforward to contact the user privately and ask them about their behaviour. Initially at least I would also seek the expertise of more experienced moderators who have possibly encountered similar situations in the past.

Ultimately, however, if the comments are inappropriate then getting them to stop, even if it involves the graduated suspension process, is more important than the value they may be contributing otherwise. (Discursive comments that are not inappropriate can simply be cleaned up.)

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

This would obviously be dealt with in private between the moderators; at worst the other moderators would be polled. I don't see any way it would go further than that. Neither I nor the other mod can claim infallibility and ultimately the community can override a blatantly incorrect moderation decision.

3. Do you expect your participation in the site to change in any way if you are elected. If so, how and why? If not, why not?

I expect that as a moderator I would double-check my writing before posting anything, to project more of a professional tone. Very much the difference between how I interact with others on my company's chat versus personal chats with friends. (Though I have reviewed my recent comments on posts and don't see anything problematic there.)

I would also back off somewhat from normal community moderation actions unless this started to cause a pile-up of reviews in the queues.

4. Given the relatively casual moderation traditionally used for this fairly small SE (e.g. letting certain minor infractions slide to help facilitate discussion and debate), how would you describe your moderation style, and would it align with or oppose this trend?

I tend to try to follow community consensus on things like this, for example when voting on close- or delete-worthy posts. That said, my impulse would still be to try to guide people to write posts as proper answers, comment appropriately, etc.

5. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?

I admit that this is the single point that is most concerning to me. I don't think I've said anything that I would later regret in this light, but as a moderately frequent contributor to chat I can't guarantee there isn't some snark out there that others might look askance of coming from a moderator. I also feel like this might make me feel less comfortable posting to chat, but that's purely a me thing.

6. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching enough reputation to access moderator tools or become a trusted user?

Largely it boils down to the fact that it would take me years longer to get there at the current rate I'm earning reputation, versus the moderator election being now.