My name is John Kieran, and here are my questionnaire responses.
To date, I have been almost entirely active with the community through answering and asking questions. I have the odd chat with a community member from time to time, but I don't currently engage to the level that most other candidates do. I intend to be more active through Meta and chats with community members regardless of the outcome of this election.
I answered a question in a hurry once, and missed the original intent of the question by a mile and a half. Only after answering did I realize what had happened when a community member pointed out to me that my answer was way off. I quickly corrected with the right information, but I can't help to think that I might have missed it altogether.
When community health is concerned, not amount of intelligence or experience can excuse abusive behavior. If I were given the task of deciding whether or not to hand the user this suspension, my only consideration given is to that of the actions which lead them to be considered for suspension.
The current moderator team is doing very well. Flags and disputes are being dealt with in a timely manner, and I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise. My moderation style would be only slightly different. I try to be as professional as possible, but the odd Dr. Who reference or Sherlock quote might accidentally slip out. As I stated before, I look at context before taking action to ensure I'm making the right decision. I do realise that things can become quite hectic in the moderator business, but I can certainly try my best.
If a moderator took an action on a question that I thought was incorrect, I would try to respect their decision. I often have differing opinions with others, and I understand that everybody's opinion counts (no matter how much I may disagree). If I have an absolute objection to the action taken on a certain question, I would communicate with the moderator who took that action, and share my opinion with them. If I could not convince them otherwise, but still wanted that action reversed, I would speak to other moderators to see if my opinion is shared by any of them. I am not afraid to admit I am wrong, so if nobody agrees with me, then that is my final action.
Chat moderation is a tricky subject. I am personally opposed to many things that are seen as "normal-ish", so I would default to SU rules if I ever doubt myself. Above all else, as long as people respect each other and the rules, they can say pretty much anything they want.
SuperUser is a community driven site, all details related to on-topic and off-topic subject matter (especially "grey areas"), should be left up to the community to decide. This is within reason, of course. Not every community consensus is going to be ideal for every situation, so intervention should be available, but sparsely used.
Being supportive to the members of the community would be a personal ideal should I become a moderator. I do not, however, believe it is something that moderators should be held to. Moderators should always be courteous and helpful to users, but not all moderators are going to come into contact with members of the community in a way that would allow for them do so. All things considered, the only fundamental responsibility of a moderator concerning users, is that they are respectful to the community members (and vice-versa).
Unanswered questions aren't necessarily a problem. They only pose as a significant deficit in the amount of people who can answer questions like those which go for months, or even years, without a valid solution. Personally, I believe the first step in cleaning up the unanswered que is to sift through questions, and determine if they have any duplicates (possibly with solutions). The next step is to decide whether or not the questions are still relevant, and bring them to attention if they are. The community needs to be involved in an effort like this, to ensure the highest quality organization that can be offered. In the end, it is a group effort to bring questions to their deserved place, in the answered question bin.
Automated tools are ideal for an environment like this. They can make repetitive, undesirable tasks manageable, and increase productivity. This being the case, there are some things that can (currently) only be done by people. I have no idea what they are, but I'm sure they exist. As a moderator, I would familiarize myself with the tools at my disposal, and use them as needed. I do not think using a "bot" would influence my moderation style in any significant way, but instead make me more efficient in my duties.
Thank you for reading,
John Kieran.