In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected from an earlier thread have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. Due to the lack of submission count, we have selected all provided questions as well as our back up questions for a total of 10 questions.
As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes. Oh, and please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written.
Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.
Good luck to all of the candidates!
We allow questions about all sorts of databases, such as Traditional RDBMSs; both commercial and open-source (e.g. SQL Server, Oracle, DB2, Postgres), slightly non-traditional databases (e.g. MySQL), NoSQL and NewSQL databases and document stores (e.g. BDB, MongoDB). As a community, we sometimes come across as looking down on all but the traditional group; MySQL is treated with mild contempt and NoSQL sometimes with open derision (though it is also widely recognised that both have their place). Is this a good thing? If not, how would you act as a moderator to encourage a different attitude in the community?
Quite many newcomers face the situation their question is not fit in for the rules of community. Details are lacking, no sources are provided, and/or several other down vote reasons arise. What is your opinion on this phenomenom of welcoming newcomer with seven down votes? Is the situation just part of the game or could you help in some way?
How would you handle a user who routinely deletes their own content because they feel it wasn't valued by the community, even tho it was a very helpful content that absolutely contributed to the greater good of the internet, it just wasn't seen by those who would have upvoted it?
What's your opinion on taking out trash, washing dishes, doing windows, vacuuming, sweeping, mopping and washing down the blackboards? That's what moderators do. The gun is just for show, there's no glamour to being a mod. All the fun stuff can be done by someone with a few hundred rep (edit, comment) so at this point you're literally scraping the crud and repeating the same three phrases to people.
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?
How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
Some of you guys are great answerers and commentators. How do you feel an 'obligation' to moderate would cut into the time you can put into sharing your knowledge? Are you going to do something different than what you can already do with your rep? Will you still answer as much?
In your opinion, what do moderators do?
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?
In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?