1. Super User's broad scope overlaps with several other Stack Exchange sites, including but not limited to Ask Different, Ubuntu, Server Fault, Unix & Linux, Software Recs, and others. How do you intend to handle issues of scope overlap? How would you handle a flag suggesting that a question about OS X be migrated to Apple.SE, or a question about bash migrated to U&L?

First and formost, it needs to be a quality question, that somehow would find a much better home on another site. I do believe the current convention is that the person asking the question should be the one who initiates a migration by flagging, in any case. I'd ask myself a few simple questions - is the question already on the other site (no point migrating a dupe), does it have sufficient quality and can it be fixed up to improve on that, and whether the potential migration target is the best place.

2. Stack Exchange has established quite a few norms over the last years, which dictate the default action to be taken in several situations. After a few weeks of moderating, you find yourself in strong disagreement with one of these policies. Would you take different actions and deviate from the norm based on your personal assessment of the situation, or would you follow the established rules in order to keep the moderation coherent? If you thought a policy needed changing, how would you approach that?

A good moderator isn't a loose cannon. I can't decide what is the right policy, simply based on personal views. Personally, I think the right way is to first bring it up with my fellow mods, with the view to bringing it up on meta. While bringing it up on meta, I'd make it clear this is a personal view, and I'd like to change the moderation norms from the current standard.

3. Super User is a community of people, and often people disagree (whether on the topicality of the question, correctness of an answer, etc). While many users discuss things civilly, some don't. What is your approach on handling arguments that get out of hand, or are distracting from the original topic?

I'd gently suggest its divergent/off topic, and suggest that maybe it needs to move to chat. I'd also probably wait till interest died down/mention I'll be doing it, merge anything that belongs on the post proper into the post, and clean up the comment thread.

If an argument is getting too heated, I'd politely suggest so, and let folk know they ought to calm down - the exact mechanism would depends on the wider context

4. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?

I've never actually allowed my actions to be dictated towards a possible political career (or a mod election). I tend to say what I think, try to be nice and polite, and try not to say anything I'll regret later.

If I get a diamond, it ought to be for precisely those things, and the soft power I've earned through it anyway.

5. Topicality (that is, whether a question is on-topic or off-topic for the site) is broadly described in the Help Center, but there are often questions that test the boundaries of the topicality guidelines, causing some users to disagree on the topicality of a question. Describe in a few sentences your personal view on the topicality rules of Super User, and how you might apply them as a moderator. You may cite other content on the network as a reference for your answer, but answer in your own words.

One of the unique things about superuser for me is that topicality is something that has evolved over time. For example, in the early days, software recommendations are on topic - currently they arn't though there's a workaround by asking them in context of a problem.

I'd look at the overall quality, and whether the question contributes to the body of knowledge as a whole when trying to decide how strict one needs to be about topicality rules. While I do believe they're necessary, and essential for maintaining the focus of the site, there's always exceptions.

In some cases as a user I've mildly disagreed with some topicality rules, spoke against them on meta, shrugged and moved on. With powers of life and death being able to close a question, in most cases, where I think I can rely on the community to decide, I'll likely leave it with them, except in a case where something is clearly, explicitly, and completely off topic.

6. 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?

I think that fact that he's a valuble user shouldn't majorly colour my opinion here. They ought to be handled like anyone else in the same situation - flags on their own merits, and comments for what they are. I do find on occation arguements dig up things that the original posts may have missed. If its pure noise though, I'd clear them up and let the user know, politely, that his posts are rather controversial.

I'd also add there have been such users in the past, in my opinion, and quite a few left the site on their own.

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

I'll talk to the mod directly about it - mods arn't infallible, and knowing the reasoning behind the closure would help understand why and when to close things. If the mod changes his mind, great, otherwise you'd have a better idea of how that mod handles those situations

8. What will you do to breathe life back into Kronos's the Super User Blog?

Write. I'm having major writer's block, but the only real way to get the SU blog back on track is to actually contribute to it.

9. A user takes major offense at content in another user's profile (e.g. about me text, or avatar) and repeatedly flags posts by that other user within a few hours, demanding that you remove the offending content from the profile. You look at the user profile, and it doesn't appear to be against the rules. Neither user is available in chat. What do you do?

Mods can superping. If the content isn't something that a reasonable individual - in this case the mods, or other users find offensive I'd reject the flag with an appropriate reason, and superping the user who was flagged. If there's a constant stream of flags, and they keep getting rejected, I'll probably end up sending a mod message to the flagger explaining in detail. A superping is public, and telling someone else someone else flagged his post would be a bad idea.

10. What is your current approach, overall, to handling new users when they come into the site and appear not to understand our rules/customs/guidelines? If you became a diamond moderator, how would that approach change, if at all? For the purposes of this question, you may assume that the new user is not posting something worthy of the "Spam" or "Offensive" flags; that would make the question too easy to answer ;) Instead, just imagine that the new user has posted an answer with quality problems, or asked a question in an "Answer" post, or asked a question that has been asked many times before and is widely duplicated -- something along those lines. Pick an example and explain how you deal with it.

I tend to handle things in a fairly standard manner. I tend to welcome them to the site, mention its not a forum, politely tell them where they went wrong, and reference them to the help site. This usually works well enough that some of my comments have possibly been adopted for per forma scripts.