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. Not every question was compiled - as noted, we only selected the top 8 questions as submitted by the community, plus 2 pre-set questions from us.

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](

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!


> It is my impression that U&L regulars tend to consider the site to be fairly high-quality and welcoming. Yet U&L is way below average among SE sites when it comes to [questions with at least one upvoted answers]( And [not everyone]( shares this impression of being welcomed. What are the major areas in which U&L should improve? If this is something that moderators have a role in, what do you propose to do about it? If not, what should we (meaning all users) be doing?

> In which time-zone do you normally operate? And, in UTC, what hours of the day can you be expected to be available for moderation?

> How do you feel about one line answers which only feature a single piece of code?

> As Stack Exchange sites go, let alone communities on the Internet in general, U&L is pretty low on strife. This might be surprising considering how people will go to war over editor choices, init systems or kernel design. Why do you think that is, and most importantly, how would you cope if this changed?

> What is your view of [help vampirism]( Is it an existential threat to the community, or just another term for the elite to use to exclude newcomers? How would you translate this view into your moderation practice?

> How will you participate in closing & deleting? As a moderator, the action of closing a question, opening a closed one, deleting an answer, etc, takes immediate effect, and does not require consensus from multiple users. How will this affect your closing & deleting behavior? Would you act as if you made normal votes? Wait for the consensus of others? Abstain entirely outside of special circumstances? Some other approach?

> What would you do with "GIV' ME TEH CODEZ" kind of questions? Close them, edit them, anything else?

> Some candidates are apparently so bad at using their editor that they left bits of editor commands in their nomination post. If you're one of them, do you think that despite your poor computer usage skills, you'll be able to master the moderator tools? If you aren't one of them, would you be able to work with a colleague who is, or do you think they should be kept out at all costs?

> 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?