7
\$\begingroup\$

I was wondering when new moderators are chosen and if this information could be added to the bottom of this page.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KorvinStarmast No, I was just wondering how and when they're chosen. The times on the election website seemed fairly random. \$\endgroup\$ – rpgstar Mar 10 '18 at 4:44
  • \$\begingroup\$ OK, then the answer nitsua60 gave you seems to have covered it. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Mar 10 '18 at 4:45
12
\$\begingroup\$

There is no set timetable for elections--they come when we (the community) feel new/more moderators are necessary.

For some context, here's (roughly) how the most recent election (2017) came about.

If one feels that a new election is needed a meta post to that effect would be the most likely starting place.

If one feels that a regular timetable is desirable, that's a separate case to be made. (If you're considering that I'd recommend reading Should Community Moderators be "elected for life", or have terms? and many of its linked brethren before starting that conversation. This is a well-trod topic; that is not to say that it cannot be re-examined, but rather that one should clearly demonstrate familiarity with the existing consensus if they wish to be taken seriously.)

\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I just want to say that this answer took me down a very informative rabbit hole of meta Q&As to the detriment of my sleeping time. Totally worth it though. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Mar 9 '18 at 6:11
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Short summary of the main reason moderators are elected for life: we have to be able to do unpopular stuff. In fact, at least half the time for most things a moderator does, the only people who notice it or know about it are probably unhappy about it, because we closed their question or removed their inappropriate content or suspended them from the site or held up a policy or etc. If we had to also be populists, ensuring everyone liked and approved of us all the time (especially going into an election cycle) it would compromise our ability to moderate — in that we couldn't do so effectively. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Mar 9 '18 at 12:00
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ A point off of that ^^: our experience here tracks pretty well with the rest of the Stack as regards moderator "refresh." In 6 years as a graduated site there have been seven different moderators. So the sometimes-raised (Stack-wide) concerns about moderation teams stagnating doesn't really seem to be a practical problem here. \$\endgroup\$ – nitsua60 Mar 9 '18 at 12:55

You must log in to answer this question.

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