User:ListenerX/Moderator stump speech July 2011

Instead of stumping for myself here, or stating what my "agenda" as moderator would be (see my third point below), I will outline what I think are the qualities we need in our moderators to make them able to perform the requisite duties, and let the reader decide the rest.


 * 1) Most importantly, we must remember the old saw, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? ("who watches the watchmen?"). Moderators are tasked with watching the Wiki and defusing conflicts by telling people to cool it off. They cannot very easily do this if they are the ones who need to be told to cool off. Hence, we do not want to elect moderators who are on record as being drama queens, or who are particularly prone to edit-warring or engaging in ad hominem-laced disputes with other editors.
 * 2) If the body of moderators is to function at all, moderators must take their role — and the Wiki — with a certain degree of seriousness, and be willing to perform their duties. We have a number of antinomian or anarchistic editors who seem to enjoy sitting back and grabbing a bag of popcorn when HCM erupts or when trolls strike. We also have a number of editors who treat the Wiki as one big joke. Moderators who think the very disputes they are tasked with resolving are good entertainment or a joke will not perform their duties well.
 * 3) Moderators must come to their duties completely free of any "agenda." As the moderator position has hitherto been delineated, it is not a "judge, jury, and executioner" role, but a role requiring them to stay completely impartial through the worst of Wiki conflicts. A good moderator must be able and willing to act in a completely even-handed manner, to call a vote on a tendentious question, not stack it in favor of their own position, and abide by the result when it is over. It would therefore be unwise to elect moderators with a history of "leaving and never coming back," or making similar theatrical exhibitions of hurt feelings when things did not go their way.

In Plato's Republic, he said in the person of Socrates that when there is no compulsory process to fill public offices, the best-qualified people are nowhere to be found, unless brought in by the fear that some less-qualified person will take their place. I fear we have already lost more than one good moderator to refusal of the nominations; but I think that if everyone votes with these guidelines in mind, we can pick out the best of those who will go on the ballot. 03:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)