Random is very, very helpful on Super User (and of course Meta Stack Overflow).

Not that other users aren't, but Random goes the extra mile, and then some. He is often so far in the distance that I can barely see him.

Should Random be penalizedrewarded for this long-term pattern of helpfulness by being elected a Super User moderator? I realize this is sort of ad-hoc, but I wanted to get the community's opinion on this.


migrated from meta.stackoverflow.com Jul 22 '10 at 18:02

This question came from our discussion, support, and feature requests site for professional and enthusiast programmers.

Are the other mods complaining about too many flags for mod attention then? –  random Mar 22 '10 at 8:17
@random yes, we wish to cut out the middle-man and sell direct at a HUGE PROFIT –  Jeff Atwood Mar 22 '10 at 8:31
Diminishing returns. –  random Mar 22 '10 at 8:50
Yes, he is too smart on finding dup than everyone else, IMHO. –  S.Mark Mar 22 '10 at 9:21
@Jeff, @random: I'm constantly closing things flagged by random anyway, so cut out that guy right now. Though in that sense you might want to add ~quack as well :P –  Ivo Flipse Mar 22 '10 at 9:43
Yes please. SU desperately needs more moderators. –  Nifle Mar 22 '10 at 9:47
Plus it would be handy if we could say we made the decision @random –  Ivo Flipse Mar 22 '10 at 12:41
@Ivo - I'd second a nomination for ~quack too. He does a lot of retagging too and if he can do it as a moderator it won't affect the front page. –  ChrisF Mar 22 '10 at 14:55
Wait, what is this "and then some" you're talking about anyway? Mile? Is that some kind of imperial measurement scale? –  random Mar 22 '10 at 15:35
Just remember your votes (close, and comment flagging) will be binding @rand, I guess getting used to it would be the most difficult thing! - Good luck! –  Juan Manuel Mar 22 '10 at 15:35
@Downvoter: Yeah, otherwise he could accidentally a comment, right? –  fretje Mar 22 '10 at 15:51
omg i had no idea those were the same person. and i used to like Eight, too. *sigh* –  quack quixote Mar 22 '10 at 16:02
I support this and already suggested to Jeff to have @random replace me as SU moderator. –  Diago Mar 23 '10 at 7:33
This needs bumping back up to the frontpage! I don't want @Diago to be replaced :P –  Ivo Flipse Mar 23 '10 at 14:32
Hoeray for getting them both on board! –  Ivo Flipse Mar 27 '10 at 15:09

9 Answers 9

Yes! He'd make an excellent moderator! He's the most prolific editor on Super User (and quite possibly Meta Stack Overflow), he's gone the extra mile to keep the site clean and he's a level-headed guy.

I'd fully support him if he were elected as moderator. It might even help me become active again on Super User if I knew there was a moderator such as him helping out the community.


I think that easily 75% of closed questions on SU contain "Eight days of Malaise" in the people voting, and he is most of times the first to notice them and vote.

Questions badly asked usually have 10 seconds of existence, before he edits them to make them smell as good as waffles with whipped cream.

He is also not only clicking, but as well explaining, commenting and teaching users why such question should be improved, or why closed.

So really, yes, for sure yes, he should be a moderator on Super User.

On Meta, though, that can mean only the universe slowly collapsing over itself.

But then who will share in all the glory of closing dupes and off-topics if he's a mod and first to a question? –  random Mar 22 '10 at 16:28
Look how good it did to Diago –  Juan Manuel Mar 22 '10 at 16:40
@random - True, you would have to wait 5 minutes before, then, to give us a chance to click too :P But anyway, the glory is not as much in the closing vote, it's in the explaining comment below (or the edits)! And in this case, either way, I win. –  Gnoupi Mar 22 '10 at 16:52
So if my math is correct, no more than 16 questions a day are closed on SU. Is that right? –  mmyers Mar 23 '10 at 21:21
@mmyers: are you basing that on number of close-votes per user on SO? in that case, no, your math is off. –  quack quixote Mar 23 '10 at 21:34
@~quack: I get 12 votes on SO, so assuming the same holds for SU, and assuming that 75% of closed questions contain "Eight days of Malaise", then I don't see what's wrong with my math. Am I missing something obvious? –  mmyers Mar 23 '10 at 21:58
@mmyers: right calculation, wrong assumption, that's all. close-votes per user was doubled for SU, so 32 questions per day. –  quack quixote Mar 23 '10 at 23:32

Random has been very helpful on SU and he would be one of my first choices for moderator additions. ~quack would also get my approval. There are a few others that have proved themselves to be very helpful on SU, but those are the top two I have noticed lately.

Core to this approval is not only flagging and editing questions, it is helping users understand why things happen or point them to the information they need. When certain questions get closed or other various site "features", these guys have helped people in a positive way.

On top of that, they have been very helpful finding duplicates, helping identify questions that can be merged, and pointing out places where moderator actions are needed. They have helped make moderator tasks much easier. Random was also very helpful when the SU rules were tightened in finding older questions and content that needed to be cleaned up or closed.

He has my endorsement. If people would rather vote for a new mod, I say let the people decide. From the response here, it sounds like random would be a top choice.

This message is Troggy approved and keep flagging away!

~quack would have to give up his '~', before being a moderator, so that people could actually yell at him when disagreeing :-] Hmm, in fact, it might be better for him to keep it, for his own mental health. –  Gnoupi Mar 23 '10 at 7:45
On top of what @gnoupi said, quack doesn't specify an email address anywhere, so even if I wanted to, I can't even contact him/her/it. –  Jeff Atwood Mar 24 '10 at 7:08
Find some way to get ~quack dragged down into this @jef –  random Mar 24 '10 at 9:14
@random: uncle! uncle, dammit, uncle! –  quack quixote Mar 25 '10 at 9:58
Looks like the tilde loss is leading up to a level-up. @qua –  random Mar 25 '10 at 10:02
@quack - now it's just obvious, you are like crawling in front of Jeff to get a moderator spot :-] –  Gnoupi Mar 25 '10 at 13:45
@gnoupi: i'm originally from the American south. when people threaten to drag you into something in my hometown, they generally mean chained to the back bumper of a pickup. ~ ain't worth the road-rash, no sirree. –  quack quixote Mar 25 '10 at 17:51
@quack - Ouchie. –  Gnoupi Mar 25 '10 at 19:40

Yes, ​​​​​​please​​!


Yes, but there should be an election (including a call for nominations) rather than an ad-hoc appointment with no announcement.

A sane suggestion emerges from the muck. –  random Mar 22 '10 at 16:00
Well, I think he would win with this publicity... –  Juan Manuel Mar 22 '10 at 16:03
If it's a one candidate election, he'll have to change his name to Eight Days of Gaddafi or something. –  random Mar 22 '10 at 16:04
weren't Troggy & Ivo appointed rather than elected? –  quack quixote Mar 22 '10 at 16:07
He'll win with a 98% of votes (2% margin of error) –  perbert Mar 22 '10 at 16:15
The problem I would have with an election is that I know multiple users I would want to see promoted, but an election would make it sound like only "one" should win. Plus an election is often only useful when it's a tough call, which this one isn't –  Ivo Flipse Mar 22 '10 at 17:04
@Ivo: i tend to agree; my problem with an election is nearly the converse -- that i don't know that many SU users who i think would be good mods, so an appointment seems more appropriate. –  quack quixote Mar 22 '10 at 17:17
I can start pointing at you @~quack ;-) Oh wait I already did! –  Ivo Flipse Mar 22 '10 at 17:22

No! I would not like that, I would prefer to lose another 2K reputation points in a new recalc, the world would be a far worse place should this be approved.

Actually, I do agree with making him a moderator, but I provide this answer for people to upvote it if they disagree, as it doesn't exist yet

There seems to be one person that disagrees but didn't bother to post this answer. I'm sure he is grateful :) –  perbert Mar 22 '10 at 16:01
(Of course this answer is a joke if that's not clear enough) –  Juan Manuel Mar 22 '10 at 16:01
Just downvoted, since I want to shut up the nay-sayers :P –  Ivo Flipse Mar 22 '10 at 17:06
I like polls where there are both yes and no answers - I get to vote twice! –  Pollyanna Mar 22 '10 at 23:06
If I downvote this answer, does that mean I'm actually supporting Random ? –  ldigas Mar 22 '10 at 23:41
The universe is a complicated place @idigas –  Juan Manuel Mar 22 '10 at 23:48

Should Random be elected a moderator on Super User?

Sources say...

it just tells me "Outlook not so good", but.... duh. –  quack quixote Mar 22 '10 at 16:21
All signs point to "Maybe". –  random Mar 22 '10 at 16:24
I got "Yes" - if enough people do this we'll have elected random randomly. (ignore the magic 8 ball's bias... :) –  Pollyanna Mar 22 '10 at 16:26
I got absolutely. –  alex Mar 22 '10 at 17:10

Random is a stand up guy, and will do very, very well.

... about half the time. –  mmyers Mar 22 '10 at 15:43
His jokes are flat. He needs passable material, let alone new stuff. –  random Mar 22 '10 at 15:46

Looks to me like he's somewhat abusive of his powers.

can you cite some specific examples? –  Jeff Atwood Oct 4 '10 at 4:33
After reviewing your account, you've had quite a few questions closed and deleted by him and myself. The main reasons for these closures where 100% within the criteria for closing, and in most cases pointed out by the community. Asking questions out of scope of the FAQ will be closed. If you considered this abuse then I would suggest you review the FAQ carefully. Most of the closures done by diamond moderators are based on closed votes or moderator flags by members of the community. We rarely if ever review every question on the site and close before any of the above has happened. –  Diago Oct 4 '10 at 9:37
Never had a problem with random... –  BloodPhilia Oct 4 '10 at 13:26
I asked a question about closed-loop DSL or DSL provided by a company that doesn't own the local loop. It was closed without comment as "too local". I asked the question again and included a comment explaining that closed-loop service is not "local" and that I wasn't asking about opinions of internet service providers. Closed again, I assume, by people who simply don't understand how the technology works and misunderstand the scope of the question. If discussions of dd-wrt routers is in-scope, I would assume that alternate dsl providers is similarly in-scope. –  chris Oct 4 '10 at 17:04
@Chris There is a significant difference asking about a hardware device and asking about a DSL provider. You were asking for opinions and experiences using a service. This is out of scope. Again. This debate is going nowhere, and I don't see it as any conclusive proof that random, or any moderator for that fact, is abusing there powers. –  Diago Oct 4 '10 at 18:32
Just as out-of-scope: questions/190298, questions/177172, questions/60683, questions/193572. My question is not specific to a country or ISP, and the best explanation is "this isn't wikipedia." Sorry to beat a dead horse here, but if you want to attract and maintain a userbase it would be prudent to not alienate users on a whim or because you're overly pedantic. Just as a random check -- 1/3rd of people on page 4 of users (sorted by rep) haven't visited here in a week. It doesn't take many nasty experiences to drive people away. But hey -- the community hath spoken. –  chris Oct 5 '10 at 2:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .