-1

The current election is adding 3 more moderators to skeptics.SE, but not replacing the existing moderators.

When do we get a chance to replace the existing moderators with newly elected moderators?

| |
  • +1 from me - seems like a legitimate question to ask. – Oddthinking Apr 6 '13 at 7:28
  • +1 I honestly wasn’t aware of that (but I think I was at some point, and forgot). – Konrad Rudolph Apr 6 '13 at 11:17
4

The decision to make mods have permanent terms appears to be based on this Meta StackOverflow question, so that would be a good place to go to understand the arguments and/or register displeasure.

| |
4

You don't. The elected moderators stay until they decide to step down.

This does not extend to moderator misconduct, though. If a moderator abuses their powers you can contact the SE team at team@stackexchange.com and they will investigate. They moderate the moderators.

| |
3

To make a long story short, moderator positions have an indefinite term length. The reasons for this are that there are basically little disadvantages and a lot of advantages:

  • moderators are closely monitored and helped by the community team which guarantees a fair behaviour

  • moderators that go rogue will be removed by the community team and the other fellow mods

  • moderators that go inactive are also monitored and new positions opened accordingly, ad hoc

  • basically most actions that mods can do, can be undone by the community (everything except deletions and suspensions, if I remember correctly)

  • mods typically have to step up and do unpopular things. Not having to worry about being being re-elected is very helpful.

Etc.

There have been long discussions about this topic on meta.stackoverflow, I suggest, as Oddthinking as well, to take a look there.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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