proofreading

Shree

18:30

Thanks

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?

If the comments truly cross the line, I'd start with the normal warning.
I'm not sure what "arguments" means in this situation - a "normal" chain of contentious comments could be fine, but it all relies on the context.

I'd give a little more latitudebut a regular pattern of comments certainly crosses the line.

How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?

Its So questioner. Can you review pls.

I am going to nominate my self.

Mithical

> I'd give a little more latitudebut a regular pattern of comments certainly crosses the line.

that needs more space, and "latitude" is a bit of an odd word choice; I'd maybe go with "leeway"

> If it's a con, I'm more likely to act first and then explain later.
I'm generally cautious when it comes to undoing moderative activities.

what does "a con" mean here?

"moderative" > "moderation"

> Because I was not ready at the time, learning times proceeded, and I believe it was a good time to proceed.

I don't know what "learning times proceeded" is supposed to mean here

> How would you deal with a situation when a fellow moderator had made a mistake, which led to the affected user asking a meta question, but the moderator is persisting that they were right in the face of the contradictory evidence?

This is when the other mods come into play, and that's how the matter was addressed.

That... doesn't actually answer the question? What does "that's how the matter was addressed" mean? What would you, personally, do in that scenario?

> The candidate score and badge really matter? A score of 38 doesn't demonstrate that I'm capable at moderation. It's number and my participate on site already demosnstrate that.

That should probably read "Do the candidate score and badge really matter? A score of 38 doesn't demonstrate that I'm capable of moderating. It's a number, and my participation on the site already demonstrates that."

> Serial downvoting ? Lets give time to deal with SO/SE UserScript. Dont care musch about downvote. Toxic things must nuked fast.

I.... don't quite understand that response.

What do userscripts have to do with anything there?

> A user has replied to an increasingly heated comment chain and used an ambiguous yet colloquial word that can be gender neutral to many people, but carries an implicit male context by itself ("dude", "guys", etc.). This comment draws a few red flags, including a custom moderator flag that accuses the person of violating the pronoun code of conduct. There's nothing else flag-worthy about the comment. How would you handle this?

As a RO warn them, frendly remind is enough. I learn so much from user [rene}(chat.stackoverflow.com/users/…) for that. If not SO/SE provides us RO power.

The question is about comments, not about chat. Your answer is about chat, and so doesn't actually address the question asked.

the last question from the questionnaire seems to have been copy-pasted twice

Shree

Humm thanks for review.

Mithical

No problem; after you've fixed some of the more serious issues (like the answers that don't address the questions), ping me with an updated version and I can go over it for grammar etc. more closely

Shree

19:17

Sorry to bothered you .

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?

If the comments truly cross the line, I'd start with the normal warning.
I'm not sure what "arguments" means in this situation - a "normal" chain of contentious comments could be fine, but it all relies on the context.

How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?

It is dependent on the context and the close reason.

Mithical

still not sure what "learning times proceeded" means

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?

If the comments truly cross the line, I'd start with the normal warning.
I'm not sure what "arguments" means in this situation - a "normal" chain of contentious comments could be fine, but it all relies on the context.

How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc. a question that you feel shouldn’t have been?

It depends on the context and the close reason.

edited a bit for readability; things I was unsure about / that need improvement are marked with !!![comment]

Shree

Thanks a lot .

Mithical

also, @Shree, you should anticipate this as a question to you specifically that I predict will be commented on a nomination: how would you, as a moderator, deal with communication issues that stem from not speaking english as a first language? when it comes to e.g. writing mod messages, how do you ensure that the person at the other end can understand what you're saying?

Shree

Non native speaker unable to participate on election ?

Mithical

Not at all - it's just something to take into consideration, because a lot of moderator work involves communication, and you want that to go smoothly.

Shree

19:28

I understand , unbale to express means I am not eligible ?

Thanks for sugggestion.

Mithical

You're certainly eligible, but it is going to provide an extra challenge.

Shree

Yep challenge refine person.

Lets see whats happen . Thanks for support and review.

Mithical

(thumbsup)

Transcript for