43
votes

Ideally Moderators are elected by the community, but until the community is large enough to hold a proper election, we will be appointing three provisional Moderators to fill those roles.

We need your help. Please nominate folks you would like to see become provisional moderators for this site. Your input will provide valuable insight to help us make our selections. You can read more about the process here: Moderators Pro Tempore.

The Nomination Process:

  • Nominate a user by posting an 'answer' below. Each nomination should be a separate answer. Use the template at the bottom of this post to complete your nomination.
  • Self nominations are encouraged. This is a volunteer activity, so users should not feel obligated to accept these positions. A self-nomination is simply a way to say, "I am very much interested in this, so let my record speak for itself."
  • Tell us about the candidates. Nominations can include links to other activities like Area 51 participation, participation in other sites, or any relevant thoughts/links that may help us make an informed decision.
  • Nominees! Please indicate your acceptance by editing the answer to accept/decline the nomination. And please ensure your profile email is correct so we can contact you. Optionally, you are encouraged to write a bit about yourself following your acceptance.

    I accept/decline this nomination.

    Hi, I am name/location/fun fact (all optional). I live in <location>, so I am generally active on this site from <time> to <time>. Some other things you may want to know about me are…

Here is what we'll be looking for in a Moderator candidate:

We are looking for members who are deeply engaged in the community's development; members who:

  • Have been consistently active during the earliest weeks of this site's creation
  • 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

Nomination Template

To nominate a candidate, copy and paste the text below as an answer and complete your nomination writeup:

<a href="http://literature.stackexchange.com/users/UserID">
<img src="http://literature.stackexchange.com/users/flair/UserID.png"></a>
<a href="http://meta.literature.stackexchange.com/users/UserID">
<img src="http://meta.literature.stackexchange.com/users/flair/UserID.png"></a>

###Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because …

16
  • 7
    If you have a nomination, please post it below. You can discuss their interest/qualifications below, but comments should not be used like a miniature chatroom to generate buzz or to test trial balloons of who may or may not become a candidate. Thanks.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:07
  • 2
    Does this mean that we're leaving private beta?
    – amaranth
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:59
  • 5
    @amaranth Yes, you are progressing, but technically not because of this post. The nomination process starts before the final evaluation is complete — but as a purely pragmatic matter, if it doesn't look like the private beta is going to make it, there's enough flexibility in the timing of this post to avoid putting the community through the motions.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:01
  • 1
    Do banned in past year rule apply here too,
    – Ankit Sharma
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:16
  • 6
    @AnkitSharma This is not an election. You can suggest whomever you like, although the consideration is very likely apt.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:19
  • 3
    @RobertCartaino Under normal elections users who have been suspended in the last year can not compete. Are users who would be normally excluded from elections via this requirement still allowed to run for pro temp?
    – Himarm
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:21
  • 6
    @Himarm Users are not "running" for pro tem. This is not an elected position; it is appointed. You are here to offer suggestions and discussion to help along in the process.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:24
  • 1
    @RobertCartaino to clarify then, can people who would not be able to run for a mod position due to suspensions be able to be appointed. bypassing restrictions set in place to limit divisive candidates.
    – Himarm
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:26
  • 13
    @Himarm I don't know why we would appoint someone who otherwise would not be eligible unless unusual circumstances dictate otherwise, but technically... yes.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:29
  • 4
    FWIW, I think that the community should be opting for at least one "new" mod, one who hasn't been a mod in the past. A fresh perspective is extremely valued here.
    – Möoz
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 20:41
  • 4
    "we will be appointing three provisional Moderators to fill those roles" - is it definitely exactly three? Given Literature's very high activity so far, I was half-expecting it to be one of those sites which gets four pro tems from the off.
    – Rand al'Thor Mod
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 21:54
  • @Randal'Thor I was thinking the same exact thing...
    – fi12
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 23:21
  • 5
    @Randal'Thor I'm not sure a week of private beta is appropriate to judge about any moderation-influencing levels of activity.
    – Cahir Mawr Dyffryn æp Ceallach
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 0:26
  • 1
    @Christian Some sites have had four pro tems from the off, so presumably in those cases the CMs did judge how many to appoint just from the private beta period.
    – Rand al'Thor Mod
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 0:30
  • 4
    It's better to go by three man approach, as it's a working formula and like any other beta site initial over-enthusiasm always reduce later on.
    – Ankit Sharma
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 6:22

13 Answers 13

Reset to default
33
votes

Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because they have shown themselves to be a good moderator over at Puzzling, and has shown themselves to be active in helping with the moderation on this site. They are also active on main Meta, which is always good in a mod :)

Emrakul is also quite familiar with the subject of this site, as shown by their position of #4 in the rep leagues.

Thanks for the nomination! It's a nomination that I'll reluctantly, but happily accept.

The community as it stands right now has strong and widely differing opinions about who we are and what we're going to be. A lot of my reluctance in accepting this nomination comes from the fact that the opinions I hold are strong as well - but I'm open to ideas, and will do my best to guide the community toward settling and better defining what it can and should be. And, just as on Puzzling, I'm very open to and accepting of the idea that my opinions might easily not be the ones we end up with.

That being said, I don't truly mind either way. There's a lot I can do as a regular user, too, to help develop and grow the community, and help us settle into a healthy stability. But if you all would like me to moderate, I'll gladly do it to the best of my ability, with joy and an open mind.

2
  • Emrakul has always been a fair and reasonable moderator on Puzzling: he's polite and friendly even to those he has reason to dislike, and even when he's made mistakes, it's been while trying to do the right thing. His love for both that site and this one is evident.
    – Rand al'Thor Mod
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:59
  • 2
    +1 Emrakul is my candidate of choice; he's patient, contributes high-quality answers, and provokes thoughtful meta discussion.
    – fi12
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 22:30
24
votes

Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because he has shown a great interest in the quality of the site, and has taken part in a great many things to help this site grow. Rand also referred many, many people to the Area 51 proposal, without which the site would most likely have not launched in the first place. Additionally, he is currently a moderator on Science Fiction and Fantasy, and has shown himself to be an exemplary moderator.

I accept this nomination.

Me and literature

I started reading at a very early age and have devoured thousands of books in my life. My only literature qualification is a GCSE, but if experience counts as a qualification, then I've always been proudly a bookworm. My speciality is fantasy (Lord of the Rings, Wheel of Time, and many others), but my resume also includes Shakespeare, Poe, Borges, Dostoevsky, Hardy, and many more.

Me and moderation

I'm currently a moderator on Literature's sister site Science Fiction & Fantasy, where I recently earned a Sheriff badge for a full year of service. In that time, I've become familiar with pretty much all the tools available to SE moderators. Impartiality has always been my watchword, as I've done my best to navigate through a site containing many different factions with very different ideas about site policy. I try to be constantly visible in case I'm needed, but not overly heavy-handed in mod actions taken. I would aim to adopt a similar approach on Literature, trying to let the community have their say before taking action, at least insofar as this is possible on a small beta site.

(To those who fear I might try to turn Literature into a books-only all-genres version of SFF, rest assured that I'm very pleased about the way this site is moving away from SFF standards. Most of my favourite posts over there are basically literary analysis, which is pretty rare on that site.)

I'm also active on several other SE sites, including in moderation duties. I have four gold Marshal badges for helpful flags, a dozen or so silver Reviewer badges for reviewing, and a total network reputation of around 130,000. Rest assured, I'm pretty experienced with Stack Exchange.

Me and Literature SE

  • During the Definition stage at Area 51, I was extremely active in promoting the proposal in all of the many chatrooms I'm active in: bugging people to follow the proposal and use up their votes on example questions, so that it could reach the next stage. While I hope the proposal would have succeeded anyway, I definitely had an effect on the speed of its success.
  • During the Commitment stage, I was the very first committer, and I referred 28 other committers to the Literature proposal - including several, such as DVK and HDE226868, who have become among our most active users here.
  • Also in Area 51, I posted How can we draw more attention to Literature?, and several community promotion ads on existing sites in order to draw attention to the proposal. Apparently I contributed to Literature discussions on Area 51 meta even more than I'd realised!
  • I have been the most active meta user since day 1. As well as voting conscientiously, I've taken part in important discussions on the future of the site, Lit.1's failures, and various scope and tagging issues. I was the first person to earn the Convention badge for meta participation, and I've now earned the first bronze tag badge on either main or meta, for .
  • On the main site, I have again been highly active, a conscientious voter and editor, as well as providing several of what I hope are high-quality questions and answers of my own.
  • I've been very active in the review queues, doing what moderation I can without diamond powers. I also have the first Deputy badge on main and over 50 helpful flags on meta.
  • I'm also apparently the most active user in Literature chat.

In summary: I have expended every possible jot of effort into helping this site to succeed, and have been doing so throughout its entire life. I will continue to do so regardless of whether or not I become a moderator here, but I would be honoured to have the responsibility of representing the site in a slightly more 'official' capacity. Thank you for your consideration.

29
  • 7
    I voted for Rand. He has 11 questions and 26 answers on meta.lit, is always respectful and obviously wants the site to run well.
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:48
  • 6
    I cant in good conscious approve of someone who hasn't finished the book series of their own namesake. :P
    – Himarm
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:52
  • 11
    @amaranth Those events were prompted by severe concerns that Rand would not make a good/conscientious moderator. He has since proved conclusively that he is; controversy over that point will not arrive here.
    – ArtOfCode
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:59
  • 6
    @ArtOfCode but votes on his nomination post show other scene
    – Ankit Sharma
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:04
  • 12
    @ArtOfCode i think ankits point is, the fact that hes attracted so many downvotes means that the community is still deeply divided on him, hence bringing drama with him.
    – Himarm
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:07
  • 13
    There are a number of users who might disagree with this "conclusive" proof. Please do not speak for the entire SFF community.
    – phantom42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:12
  • 6
    And you're welcome to that point of view, but not all SFF users agree.
    – phantom42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:18
  • 7
    Keeping comments relevant to an election in the election thread would be better imo. instead of sweeping dissension under the rug in chat.
    – Himarm
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:35
  • 13
    Given that this user would not normally be eligible for election based on policies enacted last year, is this even a valid/worthwhile nomination?
    – phantom42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:31
  • 7
    @Mithrandir Declined: Comment discussions should all receive the same level of treatment and visibility. This isn't like preserving the main Q&A with concerns about keeping the body of the post front-and-center and clean. Keep it on topic. Flag anything that veers wildly off topic or runs up against our Be Nice policy. But keep it civil, please.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:38
  • 6
    Rand has shown a strong capacity to make a good moderator, particularly recently on SFF. I won't try to bury or hide that there is a controversial history, and it's not my place to tell you whether it's something you should consider. But I'd hope we can consider both with and without historical context, and through that, we can determine whether they represent the sort of site we would want to be.
    – user80
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:49
  • 8
    @Emrakul I still feel we should try to make this young site succeed and keep it away form all kind of drama and controversy, I don't want to see good contributors quiting this site too.
    – Ankit Sharma
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 19:04
  • 11
    <comments removed> This is where we move on. The issue of activity on other sites was raised and relevant points made. Thank you for keeping it civil. But engaging in protracted debate to prove your point is devolving into a meta-discussion about how those points are being made. Let's call both sides of this conversation closed as of now. It is time to move on.
    – Robert Cartaino
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 21:29
  • 11
    @Randal'Thor's done a lot for Literature Stack Exchange. A lot. He's had a huge presence on meta and chat, and he's posted a lot of good content. Moderators should lead by example, and he has, including posting example questions about things like reading-order. Setting opinions of actions long in the past on other sites aside, I think he would be a good choice as a Literature pro-tem mod.
    – HDE 226868
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 21:32
  • 6
    IMO, whether or not you would make a good mod is irrelevant - as I see/understand it, policy disqualifies you as a regularly electable mod. I'd simply like to know if, and why this policy does not apply in this situation. My concern here is beyond just you. What's the point of creating and implementing policies if they're just thrown out or ignored at random?
    – phantom42
    Commented Feb 2, 2017 at 13:39
18
votes

Notes:

I'd like to nominate Hamlet for a few reasons:

  • Contributes high-quality content (both questions and answers) on a variety of topics (poetry, classics, fantasy, etc.)
  • Involvement on meta, starting important discussions and weighing in with his opinion
  • One of the top voters on the site, which is crucial for its success
  • Significant SE experience: active since 2011, close to 4k rep on a closely related beta site (Mythology) and active on several other sites

I accept the nomination.

My views on literature:

If you look at my profile, you can see that I enjoy talking about literature. I find literary analysis fascinating: I love how one sentence can have multiple meanings. I enjoy reading all kinds of literature: everything to fantasy to classics to mythology to popular books. Even if I am not a moderator, I will continue to participate in this site.

My vision for the site:

I don't see this as an academic level site -- for one thing, we don't have any academics. There has been a lot of debate about whether this is a site for literary analysis or factual questions about literature; I think both types of questions can coexist on the site. That said, I do think that literary analysis questions are an opportunity to distinguish this site from other sites on the network. While you can always ask factual questions on the science fiction stack exchange, literary analysis questions seem to be received better and answered better on this site.

My views on moderation:

For those familiar with the Mythology Stack Exchange Site, you probably know that I advocated for a heavy-handed moderation policy, at least with regards to academic sources. Here on the Literature Stack Exchange site, I've taken a different approach. As a moderator, I would be largely hands-off. I would defer to the community on pretty much everything, including question closures (in large part because we haven't defined our scope yet). The exceptions to this would be spam, conflicts between members, and other incidents requiring my immediate attention.

What I bring to the table:

Although I used to moderate several online communities, I haven't done so for several years, and I have no recent experience with moderation. Although I have a lot of experience with the Stack Exchange platform, I would probably lean heavily on the other moderators for my first few months.

What I think makes me stand out from the other moderators is a clear vision for the site, as well as an understanding of what literature is and what literary analysis is. My role in guiding this site to where it was now can't be understated: I created the area51 proposal, galvanized support to get the site to private beta, and have been an important voice on meta and chat.

It would be a privilege to continue to serve this site and see it to graduation.

6
  • 6
    Plus, he made this site. He created the proposal.
    – user72
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 22:40
  • 1
    @Riker Creating the proposal is a very small, yet important, portion of making a site. Either way, the idea for a Literature site has been around for a long time.
    – fi12
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 22:56
  • 4
    @fi12 you're right: creating an area 51 proposal isn't a lot of work. That said, I would characterize my contributions as more than clicking the create button. There have been multiple attempts to create a successful literature site. Not only did I create the site, but I outlined a vision for the proposal that, in my mind, played a role in getting the literature proposal out of Area 51.
    – user111
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 23:05
  • @Hamlet Valid point.
    – fi12
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 23:07
  • 4
    I can vouch for @Hamlet over on Mythology and I'd be quite happy to see him modding here. :)
    – Lauren-Clear-Monica-Ipsum
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 15:43
  • 5
    I'll add another vote in favor of @Hamlet as a good candidate. He's one of the strongest non-mod voices on Mythology, and has done a lot to shape the site. On Literature, he's been extremely focused on good content, something that many of us have sometimes bypassed during scope discussions. I'm also very confident in his moderation ability, period.
    – HDE 226868
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 16:28
17
votes

http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/5129611.png?theme=dark

Notes:

The nominee has done good work helping the site grow, e.g. this. They clearly aren't in this for the glory but for Greater Good, as shown by nominating 3 other people ahead of self.

I am Mith, and I accept this nomination.

Here is some info that I think will be relevant:

  • Me

I live in the Middle East, but I was born in the USA and lived there till I was 8. I speak English and Hebrew. I am generally on between 10am and 12am every day my time (that's midnight, not noon!), which is 8am to 10pm UTC. I am often on when there's a spam flood (detected by Smokey), and generally none of the other users are online then.

  • Me and reading

I have always been a bookworm. I prefer fantasy and science fiction, mostly, but I also have an appreciation for any book. I will read almost anything.

  • Me and Literature.SE

Note: Further updates will go to this Google Doc.

I committed to the Area 51 proposal, and then referred three users, two of which I haven't seen, :(, and @BESW.

I've been fairly active in all ways - posting, meta, and voting. I also have 67 helpful flags.

I was the second user to reach the Moderator Tools privilege, at 1000 reputation, and have used my delete and undelete votes fairly, I think. I was also the third to have the 'Trusted User ' status.

I am also very active on chat. You can find me in: The Reading Room | The Sphinx's Lair | Charcoal HQ | The Singularity | Mos Eisley

I joined the site 23 minutes after I received the email notification, and am user number 58. I asked the 12th question on the site.

I also used to have the top-voted answer on the site for a while. Update: I now have the top-voted answer again.

In addition, I was the second user to start a bounty, and the first to award one.

Also, I apparently am the second most active meta user.

Notable Badges

Convention | Enlightened (first to have 5) | first Proofreader | first Altruist | Beta | Strunk and White | Civic Duty | Guru

  • Me and moderation

I am an administrator on two Wikias, the Hystorian Wikia and the TombQuest Wiki. I keep them free of spam. :P

I have never been a mod on SE before, nor have I ever been suspended.

I do have over 1400 helpful flags across the network, with 6 Deputy badges on the network, (SFF | Puzzling | Meta | SO | Ask Different) | Ask Ubuntu compared to 40 declined (network-wide). (See this userscript to get a network-wide summary.)

  • Recommendations

These are people from the Charcoal project, the project to keep SE free of spam. I have been hanging out there a lot. You can check out the main chatroom, Charcoal HQ, and help flag spam.

@angussidne

@ArtOfCode (mod on two sites!)

I've been a moderator for a couple years, and have developed a sort of seventh sense for people who make good moderators. Mithrandir is one of them. He's annoyingly good at remaining calm and collected, and has an awesome attitude to learning about things that I'm sure he'd apply to the moderator role.

@Glorfindel

Mithrandir is an active member of Charcoal HQ, helping to moderate spam, rude/abusive posts and low quality posts across the Stack Exchange network. He does this not only by flagging them; he participates actively in discussions about our policies and how they apply to different sites in the network. The efforts and understanding he has shown so far, combined with his passion for this site's subject, will make him a good moderator, regardless of his age.

I believe that I can be a fair and good moderator, and hope people agree.

16
  • 2
    My chat message wasn't exactly a glowing recommendation, but yes. I believe Mithrandir would make a good moderator, based on what I know of him and of the types of people who are good moderators.
    – ArtOfCode
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:32
  • @ArtOfCode yeah, but I thought it was worth mentioning anyway :P
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:49
  • 3
    @Mithrandir Oh, definitely - just that I'd have given you a better one if I'd known you were going to link it :)
    – ArtOfCode
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:02
  • @ArtOfCode a bit late, but exactly my thoughts. I mean, my 'recommendation' could've only been written by an Elf...
    – Glorfindel
    Commented Feb 5, 2017 at 21:02
  • @Glorfindel please, feel free to write me a better recommendation.
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Feb 6, 2017 at 19:59
  • @ArtOfCode ^applies to you too
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Feb 6, 2017 at 20:00
  • Here you go. For clarification to future readers, the chat message Mithrandir originally linked to was not intended to be a recommendation, but a reply to a question.
    – Glorfindel
    Commented Feb 6, 2017 at 20:21
  • 1
    Mithrandir is an active member of Charcoal HQ, helping to moderate spam, rude/abusive posts and low quality posts across the Stack Exchange network. He does this not only by flagging them; he participates actively in discussions about our policies and how they apply to different sites in the network. The efforts and understanding he has shown so far, combined with his passion for this site's subject, will make him a good moderator, regardless of his age.
    – Glorfindel
    Commented Feb 6, 2017 at 20:21
  • @Glorfindel thanks, I've updated the link. :D
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Feb 6, 2017 at 21:02
  • 1
    Mithrandir, I haven't known you long, mainly via Literature chat. I'm impressed by your Stack moderation activity; having raised over 1000 flags myself it's no small feat and I'm confident you would have developed over time the ability to judiciously determine what needs action. However I'm also mindful that moderators are put in the firing line of a lot of abuse (more than the public sees) and must have patience and care with some of the worst people. I am skeptical of whether you may be prepared for that. Hopefully that may never be a problem on Lit.SE; realistically I should expect it will.
    – doppelgreener
    Commented Feb 7, 2017 at 21:57
  • @doppelgreener (First, since I didn't self-nominate, that didn't ping me.) To address your concerns: Thankfully, I haven't had much experience getting yelled at by people here, but I have had some nasty comments thrown at me on the Internet over time. I didn't really care - if you're a troll, then I don't care how much you insult me, I refuse to be goaded. I believe that I would be able to handle dealing with people who are attacking me without blowing up, and stay calm. (I have experience in real life staying calm when I'm getting yelled at, and on the Internet it's more removed, [cont]
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Feb 8, 2017 at 10:30
  • @doppelgreener [cont] so it affects me less.) There are also going to be 2 other mods that will be able to support me, and if I ever feel like I'm getting too worked up, I can back off for a moment, take a drink, and then head back to the computer.
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Feb 8, 2017 at 10:31
  • 1
    Oh hey, I meant to write that and never got around to it. I've been a moderator for a couple years, and have developed a sort of seventh sense for people who make good moderators. Mithrandir is one of them. He's annoyingly good at remaining calm and collected, and has an awesome attitude to learning about things that I'm sure he'd apply to the moderator role.
    – ArtOfCode
    Commented Feb 15, 2017 at 9:46
  • 2
    @Mithrandir , I am in awe of your accomplishments and dedication to the site, but... I don't think this thread needs to be constantly bumped up to the top of Meta :-/ Maybe you can keep an up-to-date summary in your user description, and just link to there?
    – Standback
    Commented Feb 15, 2017 at 13:18
  • 1
    @Standback - okay, I've put a link to a Google Doc in.
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Feb 16, 2017 at 11:37
15
votes

Notes:

I have been a temp mod on two sites: movies and the previous iteration of literature. I work well with other moderators, discussing issues on the site and determining the correct actions to move forward. I have a vested interest in seeing the new literature site succeed and would like to help it do so.

17
  • 2
    I'd also like to point out that while you have a low rep compared to some of the other folks being nominations, it's not at all representative; you've made outstanding contributions in meta and on chat.
    – HDE 226868
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:13
  • thank you @HDE226868 I was tempted to write about that, but didn't want to get long winded
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:17
  • 4
    I have seen your moderation before and even took tips from your work. So you seems like a perfect choice to me.
    – Ankit Sharma
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:22
  • 2
    I think the perfect mod team up for the site would be: someone from scifi, someone from movies, and someone that just LOVES literature
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:23
  • 5
    I'm curious why you think "someone from movies" specifically would make a good moderator for a site that is not at all about movies?
    – Michael Edenfield
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:30
  • @MichaelEdenfield or from SFF either, as we don't want same old controversies and drama. So better someone get selected as per there potential here rather then somewhere else
    – Ankit Sharma
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:39
  • 2
    I definitely agree with the votes here. DForck42 has been patient and welcoming, and is the kind of candidate I'd want to see as a moderator. My only concern would be with site activity, but I think, in the long run, that's okay.
    – user80
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:56
  • 3
    @DForck42 That makes more sense; you're saying that a moderator that it would be a benefit to have someone who is already familiar to users of M&TV, or SF&F, moreso than someone who "moderates a site about movies". As Ankit mentions, though, those people would inevitably bring their drama/baggage/etc. from those sites here, and those sites you mentioned are kinda known for being heavy on the silly drama... so there is a trade-off here.
    – Michael Edenfield
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 16:57
  • 2
    @MichaelEdenfield almost every site has their drama, it's just a matter of having the right people to direct it in a productive direction
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:19
  • 2
    I agree, but we shouldn't discount the benefits of having a "fresh set of eyes", so to speak, vs. having lots of experience. Personally, I also tend to believe that moderators do better when they can focus on a single site.
    – Michael Edenfield
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:10
  • 1
    @MichaelEdenfield I never stated that they had to be mods previously or currently ;-)
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 18:55
  • 7
    -1 Sorry, but I can't really agree with all that's written here. You've certainly made some valuable contributions, but you've posted several negative unsupported answers to several of my meta questions with little more reason than "This is a bad idea".
    – fi12
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 22:16
  • 3
    As an example of what I mean, DForck42's (now deleted) answer to this question is "No, this is dumb and overly complicated." One line and that's it. I'm not doubting his contributions to the site, but I just don't see his activity as representative of a potential moderator.
    – fi12
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 22:46
  • 2
    @fi12 i'll admit, a couple of those were in bad taste. I wasn't feeling good and was also a bit frustrated. I apologize for being a bit short. those are MAJOR exceptions compared to how I normally am on SE
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 22:58
  • 4
    @MichaelEdenfield More so than the users I'd rather think the topics themselves are quite similar. I'd imagine Literature to face similar discussions about the nature of "subjectivity" and "interpretation" and how to make that work on SE as similar existing sites about analysing creative works. That way the site is most closely related to sites like Movies & TV, Science Fiction & Fantasy, or Anime & Manga.
    – Cahir Mawr Dyffryn æp Ceallach
    Commented Jan 31, 2017 at 0:32
8
votes

DECLINED

Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because she is always willing to help people and listen to their issues in an unbiased and respectful manner. Steeler has known love of Literature, even if she is not the highest in reputation, but I feel her "soft skills" in knowning to handle clashing personalities more than make up for that.

Posting @steelersquirrel's comment in the post as she did not have edit privileges:

Thank you so much for the nomination. I am extremely flattered that you have faith in me as a moderator. However, I will have to respectfully decline this nomination. I love this site and I love Stack Exchange, but I am just not interested in becoming moderator. I will continue to promote this site to the best of my ability and to make everyone feel welcome and a part of this community. Thanks again for your confidence in me and your kind words

6
  • 5
    omg yes, the squirrel would be an excellent mod and would definitely help ease any tensions and just help make the site more welcoming
    – DForck42
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:52
  • 4
    Yes! Squirrel for mod!
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:53
  • 4
    I think she'd be a good mod, but I'm not sure she's the best choice. She's not very active on the site, and I think there are other better options.
    – user72
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 15:53
  • 1
    Nobody can be as neutral as she is but she doesn't even want it to so keep it that way.
    – Ankit Sharma
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 17:48
  • 2
    +1 despite self-declining. Just to show support to a valuable memeber of many communities.
    – DVK
    Commented Jan 30, 2017 at 20:13
  • 3
    + 1, 'cause squirrels
    – Gallifreyan
    Commented Feb 9, 2017 at 14:06
6
votes

DECLINED

http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/4816578.png

Just to let folks know, HDE 226868 does not want to become a pro-tem candidate. See chat.

0
6
votes

DECLINED

Notes:

I am nominating BESW because BESW is a voice of reason on meta and chat, because BESW has a clear expertise in the subject matter, and because BESW has extensive experience with the Stack Exchange platform, as evidenced by their activity on the Role Playing Games Stack Exchange.

1
  • You're very kind, but I must decline.
    – BESW
    Commented Feb 20, 2017 at 20:28
5
votes

profile for fi12 on Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/7534499.png

I'm throwing my hat in the ring here, because I love literature and I'd consider myself to be a pretty active member of this site. I'm:

  • fourth third by meta participation
  • eighth by main site rep,

and I've contributed several high-traffic scope questions about our site. (See this answer, this question, this question, and this reminder.) I'm the highest rep user on Language Learning and am fairly active on Worldbuilding as well (both fairly related to literature).

I'm active in the review queues as well. If you'd like to have me, I'd love to be the moderator for Literature. Regardless of whether I'm appointed or not, however, I still plan on being an active member of this site, contributing to help it grow.

My ultimate vision for the site is to see it filled with both academic, scholar-level questions, as well as more amateur questions; after all, our site should cater to nearly all literature enthusiasts and researchers. I have no prior StackExchange moderation experience, so this would be my first moderator post if appointed. As a moderator, I'd opt for a removed but engaged position; essentially, I'd let the community moderate itself, and only step in really severe or clearly off-topic situations.

0
5
votes

DECLINED

Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because he has shown himself to be interested in the health of the site, as evidenced by his extensive Meta participation, and has good knowledge of the subject matter, as shown by his main site participation. In addition, he also moderates Writers.se, a similar site.

1
  • 2
    Oh! Thank you :D I'm very gratified. I'm afraid I'm going to decline, though. I don't have the bandwidth at the moment -- and I also just don't feel like I grok the site, or its potential, well enough to moderate. I prefer to focus my energy on participation, for the time being.
    – Standback
    Commented Feb 15, 2017 at 22:58
4
votes

profile for Easterly Irk on Stack Exchange, a network of free, community-driven Q&A sites http://stackexchange.com/users/flair/7140467.png

Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because he has shown himself to be interested in the quality of the site, reviewing and editing and other tasks. He has also shown knowledge in the field, with 43 answers, and is the second user to the top in the reputation leagues. He has also shown that he can use the 10k (1k now) tools well, helping me to delete/undelete things that needed attention.

I accept this nomination.

Hi, I'm Riker. I live in southern california, in the US, so I'm normally active from 7:30 AM PST (3:30 PM UTC) to 6:00 PM PST (2:00 AM UTC).

I'm not out of high school yet and am homeschooled, so I'm normally active during the day as I work on stuff.

I haven't been a mod before, and I don't have too much network rep (9650 at the time of writing), but I don't think that will be an obstacle.

2
votes

DECLINED

Notes:

This nominee would be a good choice because they have proven themselves to be a good user, with a good grasp of the site's workings. Admittedly, they aren't that active in Meta, but that can always change ;)

They are fairly active on the main site, with over 1100 rep. They were the 9th user to join the site, so pretty early. I believe that Darth1 could be a good mod.

Thanks for the nomination! However I must decline...

I would love to help this site as much as possible, and really want to be as involved as I can. I love literature and hope that this site soon comes out of beta and eventually graduates.

However, I will decline being a mod. I am only 14, and have a lot of school stuff and exams so wouldn't have the time or experience to feel lie I could fulfill this role to the best of my ability.

I hope that one day though this may be a possibility for me.

Thanks all the same!

1Yes, Darth. It's a long story (not really). Ping Mith in chat and I'll tell you.

1
vote

Notes:

I would like to nominate verbose for a number of reasons:

  1. Verbose has clear expertise in the subject matter, as evidenced by their answers on this site.

  2. Verbose understands the Stack Exchange platform, as evidenced by their participation here and their 4K rep on Stack Overflow.

  3. Verbose is active on meta and chat, showing an interest in making the site successful.

2
  • 1
    I was going to nominate verbose, but I think it's a little late now, as they've started sending out the emails to the people that they're planning on appointing.
    – Mithical Mod
    Commented Feb 20, 2017 at 20:06
  • I'm flattered, but as @Mithrandir says, the point is moot. I didn't get around to considering whether or not I should accept, but I think the top few vote getters above (including but not limited to the top three) would all make excellent mods anyway, so I'm not heartbroken at being out of the running. Thank you very much for the nomination!
    – verbose
    Commented Feb 21, 2017 at 5:26

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