1. A pretty important part of moderation is engaging the community. How have you engaged the community so far, and what do you intend to do as a moderator to build on that?

I used to engage with the community on a daily basis, and I still do, just not in the way I used to. Most of the time I was active I usually either answered questions (that's how I got my rep), or commented on questions, and answers.

I intend to build on this as a moderator, by helping shape the community as it stands further into something both the community, and former (as well as present) moderators would be proud to say "Yes, I helped shape that community into what it is today"

2. Nobody's perfect. What is one mistake you made and what did you do when you noticed it?

One of the biggest mistakes I made, was asking a question, without detail. Once I noticed that I'd forgotten to include details, I edited the question (that will stick with me for the remainder of my time here)

3. A user has a long history of posting borderline (and sometimes not-borderline) abusive comments, and they just started up again. They've been given short suspensions a couple times, but it didn't get the point across. They're now due for a year-long suspension, according to the standard progression. They're also a prolific contributor to the site, with vast expertise in $Technology. Do you consider this in how you handle the case? How?

I do consider all variables when handling moderation cases. I would consider their participation in the community, and the offence. In this case, I would opt for a non-standard one month ban (due to the member's participation), and hope that said member will have enough time to cool down

4. How do you feel the current moderator team is doing, and how do you view your style of moderation compared to the current team? What one flaw of the current moderator team set do you think needs addressing?

I feel that the current moderation team is doing very well. As far as I have noticed, the community is doing really well, and is thriving. My moderation style is possibly more passive than the current team's style, but that may change.

To mind, I can't think of a flaw in the current team at all (I enjoy their moderation style, and their methods)

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

I would ask them why they felt the question needed to be closed/deleted/etc, and explain why I think the question shouldn't have been. Moderation is a team effort, so I feel that a mutual compromise should be met (for example, leaving the question in it's current state, or restoring a question)

6. What is your philosophy on moderation in Chat?

My philosophy on moderation in Chat is to let users talk freely, so long as the content of the chat doesn't go against the SU rules. It's a place where users can say (almost) anything, and shouldn't take fear of being banned, after all, we all like conversation.

7. There are subjects that are within the purview of the site but considered a "gray area". Examples might include such things as circumventing user agreements, which some people consider to potentially involve unethical behavior. They are a gray area because they are not officially prohibited, like piracy, but are generally deemed off-topic due only to precedent. Specific issues of this nature are periodically raised on Meta to poll member input on whether they should be on topic. This question is not about your opinion for or against such topics. Here is the question: Should the decision as to acceptability of any and all gray area subjects be a matter of community consensus, or should at least certain cases be based on foundational principles and not subject to community preference? And why?

I believe that we should take a mix of both community consensus and foundational principles, on a case-by-case basis. As to why, mainly because I (personally) think that we should let the community have some say as to what happens to their habitat.

8. Beyond answering questions and participating in community moderation functions, some members take an active role being supportive to new users. This can include such actions as suggesting helpful resources, explaining site nuances, helping to polish their posts through advice or edits, providing words of encouragement, providing friendly input when comment threads become unfriendly, etc. Any member can be supportive, but for a moderator, is it a fundamental responsibility?

I think that being supportive is definitely a bigger part of being a moderator, but not necessarily a fundamental responsibility. However, it doesn't hurt to be friendly, and in most cases, friendly is really good.

9. There are currently 110,000 unanswered questions, which is around 1/3 of the total number of questions. Do you consider this to be a problem and do you have any ideas on how to go about organizing this work? E.g. would you organize 'cleanup' events on Meta to encourage users to look at the Unanswered queue?

I do consider it a problem. Personally, I would organise cleanup events to try and clear away at least a part of the unanswered queue, as well as encouraging users to see if they can't answer some older unanswered questions first.

10. Across the network several teams are working on, or have already deployed, automated tools (bots if you like) to assist in flagging posts for SPAM, Not an answer or plagiarism. Can you elaborate on how you expect these tools/bots influence your moderation?

I think that the bots will make moderation easier, due to them identifying problem content, however, like all things, a tool is only a means to an end. Moderators still have to make the final decision.

I will add this though. If ever I get stuck, I have a whole team behind me, as does every mod. If I can't figure it out, then I'll consult with the team to come to a decision.