→ 29 messages moved to Chimney

o/

\o

\ס/

Time for yogurt! :D

Peach, pineapple, or strawberry?

peach

!!/randomchoice Peach pineapple strawberry

@ShadowWizardHatesOmicron No such command 'randomchoice'.

:(

using FOX

@Tink FOX doesn't agree with you ;(

Well then who are you going to listen to... me or a bot named after a fake news network?!

@Tinkeringbell well he fixed his choice

@ShadowWizardHatesOmicron Good.

Means I have some power left over this world still ;)

And it's after this fox, not the news network... lol :P

waffles!

@ShadowWizardHatesOmicron Well guess who missed the joke :P

@Tinkeringbell Shad-something

:D

hmm

Tempting... ;)

Can't know until you try. If you have enough reputation there, might as well go for it.

> "so.... Genshin adds a character based on a fox (not going to annoy you with the detils). After about 5 minutes, the expected fan-art comes in."

🚽

@SPArcheon ah... the legendary video...

@SPArcheon :)

@Feeds maybe switch some personnel from blog to fixing bugs, onebox has tons of those bugs.

Looks like they now post every day in the blog.

hmmm I finished a big task at work, and have about one hour before going home.... think it's better to wait for tomorrow morning before I publish it on production. ;)

looking for next task

Project is too big of a term, it's "just" one task in a project, but big task.

→ 9 messages moved to Chimney

@ShadowWizardHatesOmicron There is also: parenting.stackexchange.com/election

@Rob yeah, already taken, past moderator is back.

Unless most members of the site really don't like her, I can't see any chance she won't be elected. ;)

That said, if there are two mod positions available, and only one nomination, what will SE do? Run another election soon after?

@ShadowWizardHatesOmicron since this is not a beta election, the nomination period will be extended for 1 week, and if it's still not enough (position+1 for being a competitive election), usually canceled.

We've occasionally ended beta elections without extending but that's usually an accident. In general, all elections should be extended if they don't have N+1 candidates.

@Catija if if still not enough candidates, cancel?

I've seen it cancelled and the sole candidate simply given the position, other times it's been ran again a few times.

@Rob hmm if the candidate got the position it's not considered being canceled, rather auto win.

Full site elections, we cancel after extending a week and try back after having a conversation with the community... usually after about 3-6 months. For beta site elections and sites just leaving beta, we're more flexible and often just appoint the candidate.

(I mean whole election being canceled, not the Primary phase.)

@Catija oh, I see. Thanks.

Anyway both sites in question here are in beta. :)

I'm not completely convinced that the move to have beta sites have elections instead of the previous manual appointment system was a good one.

One of those sites probably has candidates, the other I suspect might be more difficult to find people to run: proofassistants.stackexchange.com/… substrate.stackexchange.com/…

The first, and primary, reason, is that it effectively turns them into popularity contests. In the previous system, a candidate could earn lots of popularity, but a CM could look into their past interactions and deny them the slot if they think they aren't well cut-out for moderation. See chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/54414162#54414162

There have been multiple incidents of mods who win popularity, then go on to show that they don't have much moderation skill, or end up getting removed for violating policies.

The second reason is that the 300-rep requirement to nominate denies quite a few good mods from even standing. This is especially relevant on brand new sites undergoing their first election. I remember running the thread for Software Recommendations' pro-tem mods, and at least two of the three mods who were selected didn't have 300 rep at the time they (were) nominated.

i mean

it's an election, popularity is always the #1

@SonictheAnti-NewVariant-hog I'd broadly agree, but I don't think manually appointing mods was sustainable for the CM team.

For long-running betas getting additional mods it makes perfect sense (in fact I'd argue they are good in that case), but for brand new sites, not so much. Their initial team should be manually appointed, then subsequent mods should be elected.

Of course, the CM team isn't "Cat and 'Nat" anymore - we've gotten a few more CMs since that time period - so maybe it'd be sustainable again.

There's also an additional factor: the previous system allowed users to nominate other users. This could be a good thing, since a user who participated a lot/showed clear moderation skill, who didn't previously think of being a mod/weren't aware of how elections worked or that there was one ongoing, would know about it and thus more likely to join the team.

@Mithical If it were sustainable again, or if it being sustainable weren't a concern - which side would you take?

I'd prefer the manual appointments. It also allows for the selection of mods with different skills - I recall someone, probably Shog, saying something about choosing a topic expert, a network expert, and a chaos monkey. The intersection of different strengths allows for a mod team that's more equipped to handle different parts of the mod position.

@Mithical One could argue that it could potentially result in more work for the CM team, since they'd be more likely to get a candidate who'll get removed, and thus would have to re-run an election to get a replacement for them (which has the same risk).

@SonictheAnti-NewVariant-hog re: your last comment, see the last line of the question: Michael Meyers was elected before the current election system. However, it was a formal election at the time, and so discounted by the question

@Mithical Yeah, the 2010 one was a proper election, since they used an earlier version of the current election system that doesn't map directly with the current one.

Yeah, same goes for the 2009 election.

Am I confused about @Mithical's question? It says when were the last... which I'm interpreting as "Most recent"... but all of @SonictheAnti-NewVariant-hog's questions seem to relate to the first case of a mod to be appointed.

Oh. The tangential question. That's... a really separate question, though.

Yeah, asking two tangentially-related questions in one post hasn't worked for me before.

I've probably been spending too much time on Lit, then...

Having been the person who appointed those two, it's really easy for me to answer that question. Having not been on the platform for the other part, it's practically impossible without me begging someone for help with SEDE... so... yeah. Difficult to get a full answer from me, anyway.