And now for the last question from The 7 Essential Meta Questions of Every Beta, who should our Pro Tempore moderators be?

The issue of holding fair elections is largely technical. The long-term solution will likely come from us. Still, bring up these issues in meta. There is a lot of room for innovation. Discussing the criteria of a great moderator is important and picking out potential candidates is a great way to introduce outstanding contributors to your community. And we are completely open to appointing temporary Moderators when someone’s contribution makes them a standout choice for your community’s human exception handler.

For more detail see: Moderator Pro Tempore and Stack Exchange Moderator Elections Begin.

You can nominate yourself here or you can nominate another user that you think will be a good moderator.

The final decision on who becomes pro tempore moderator lies with the SE team, until we get out of beta and get our real moderator elections.


I'd like to nominate David Hedlund. He's the second highest ranked user after Fabian, and not only is he also active on meta but he writes really amazing posts to back up his opinion.

  • I'll support this moderator nomination if @David seconds it.
    – Sklivvz
    Mar 4 '11 at 13:40
  • 1
    I'll have to mull it over. Responsibility has, in the past, been amazingly effective in curbing my enthusiasm for something, so I don't know if I'd be a very good moderator :) I appreciate the nomination, though! Mar 4 '11 at 14:15

I think you're an obvious candidate yourself, Fabian, being the highest ranked user, and being very active at meta as well.

Another user that comes to mind is Borror0, for posts in meta that I at large agree with, which of course seems like a relevant criteria to gain ones support in these regards.

I don't know if you guys are up for it, tho. I think you're doing an excellent job as it is, regardless...

  • I'd be happy to help as a moderator, I accept the nomination.
    – Mad Scientist Mod
    Mar 4 '11 at 14:00
  • Same for me. Hopefully thsoe votes are for Fabian and me. I'd hate to be riding on Fabian's coattails.
    – Borror0
    Mar 4 '11 at 14:15
  • Yeah, I did realize that as I was posting, but that was before this thread was made CW, and I didn't think this was going to be an actual nomination thread. For the proper election thread, you can only nominate yourself, but that's something entirely separate, right? I have no idea what an upvote here really means at the moment :) Mar 4 '11 at 14:18
  • This thread is just to give the SE team some idea who the community thinks would make a good moderator. The pro-tem moderators are appointed by the SE team, the elections will only happen after we graduate out of beta.
    – Mad Scientist Mod
    Mar 4 '11 at 14:52
  • Thanks for clearing that up @Fabian :) Mar 4 '11 at 14:56
  • It's IMHO not such a good idea to name more than one candidate, because you have to vote both up or down. Mar 24 '11 at 2:57
  • @user: These are not the nominations where users will be elected; see the comments above your own. For those nominations, people will only be able to nominate themselves. Mar 24 '11 at 7:18

If nobody else will I'll nominate myself :) Richard Stelling.

  • I set up SkpeticExchange.org (the SEv1 or this site)
  • I create the proposal the eventually became Skeptics.SE
  • I spammed twitter for months to get the beta launched
  • I mainly ask questions

NB: The quality of questions and answers in the private beta has be amazing, far better than I had ever hoped for.


I like to nominate Russell Steen.

  • Just FYI, the real moderator elections will only happen after the site graduates out of beta. And then all candidates have to self-nominate.
    – Mad Scientist Mod
    Mar 23 '11 at 14:57
  • Thanks for the compliment Christian :) Mar 23 '11 at 19:12

I'd like to nominate myself as a moderator, if you want me :-)

I am a long time SE user (since the beginnings of SO), but most of all I am deeply interested in this site and community. I truly believe this site can be varied and interesting and a useful resource for the internet community at large.

  • I'd vote for you! Some of my own weaker answers have met valid criticism from you, which is something I appreciate :) Also, you're the only one out of the nominees so far who has confirmed that you'd be keen. Mar 4 '11 at 11:58
  • 2
    In my experience, your style of discussion is too much like in politics - you try to win the debate even with poor arguments you aren't convinced of yourself. Then you tend not to understand what the point of your opponent is. I'm sorry and hope you aren't offended. Mar 24 '11 at 3:00
  • I am totally not offended. Note that these are not the real nominations, so you may want to comment on the real ones, if I decide to nominate myself then.
    – Sklivvz
    Mar 24 '11 at 6:53

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