I need to make a quick announcement.
Part of the reason that this election is taking place is that I have "ascended" and accepted a position as a Core Developer here at Stack Exchange, inc. As you may have noticed I'm already at work in the bug mines closing bugs on meta.so.
So basically this leaves one community moderator spot open for ...
I'll elaborate, but I don't want to waste much time on this.
Can you prove [any scientific fact]?
No, we are not mathematicians. We are not a court of law.
We would routinely edit out such language. So the better title would be:
Did a plane hit Pentagon on September 11, 2001?
My point was we already have that question on the site.
You have tried to ...
Because I was elected as a moderator, but then hired by Stack Exchange as a developer. Developers, employees and community managers do not normally appear in that list even if they have mod powers.
Generally speaking, I act as a mod only on skeptics since I moderated the site since the beginning and I know how the community works. I don't really moderate ...
I'd be willing to put my name forward for one of the positions. I spend enough time on here as is, and I'd like to think I've been a cooling presence on the network. I'll go along with @fredsbend and put my vote count to a pulse check as well.
FWIW there's a transcript here of a chat which hints at the kind of answer Sklivvz wanted:
for example take a group of programmers and split it in half, one half being denied the use of stack overflow. give them the same problems and measure KPIs
He's looking for published results available via Google Scholar, and/or experiments from an economist.
I would have deleted your answer as well if I were a moderator of the same reasons that were outlined by the others. This really is a research level question that someone could get a solid paper and maybe even a thesis out of and your answer is very hand-wavy and mildly editorialized (i.e. "Jeffs bureaucracy") in way that doesn't really add much to the ...
I wasn't a moderator involved - so I can't directly respond to motivations, but I can address some side issues.
Was this "unilateral moderator action"?
Well, in a way, all comment deletions are performed by one moderator - there is no voting involved, so it could be described that way. However, there was a system-generated flag warning all the moderators ...
First, let's get the vagueness out of the way. It is I!
I post this comment so often, I have it as a template:
Please provide some references to support your claims.
(That makes it a little less personal, but stops me from getting snippy about having to post it all the time.)
I also am the author of the locked FAQ question, and I accepted the answer - ...
Welcome to Skeptics.SE. I'd recommend having a read of our Welcome to New Users.
In particular, this section:
Generally, a high-quality Skeptics question will:
Point to a statement that someone well-known has made (or a number of less well-known sources)
Quote from it (a direct quote, not just a paraphrase)
Express some doubt and ask if it is true.
I was acting as a moderator on that comment, but I screwed up and I apologize to David for that.
Here's what happened:
David Hammen posted an answer which received a ton of upvotes.
Its core point was not supported by evidence (or better, such evidence was linked elsewhere and not quoted, so it was not apparent)
The question has a lot of other answers, ...
The other comments contained at least tangentially relevant links
It's policy across all stackexchange sites to not have too many comments.
Too many comments can detract/distract from the questions and answers.
If a link were relevent then perhaps it should be in an answer, not in a comment.
As a (non-moderator) user I occasionally flag comments which (...
I don't want to promise a nomination, but I want to express interest. I would hope to be a positive force on the moderation team, producing a synergistic effect, however, I don't have full confidence that my personality and preferences would work well with the current team. I'm only answering as a leap of faith on Odd's word that a diversity of viewpoints is ...
A couple of years after this question was posted, the list changed again.
Sklivvz is back on the list, but is marked as being "appointed 2/17/2017" (although he was one of the original mods pro tem and was reelected via a formal election in 2012). February 2nd, 2017 is the same day that it was announced on Meta SE that he would no longer be an employee.
First of all, thanks for your (continued) patience, and for sticking with us so far.
This won't be your last message here, unless you choose so. There is absolutely no problem with reasonable criticism.
You are bringing up two separate issues, let me handle them separately:
The deleted answer.
The problematic statement is the following:
The instructor ...