I am **music2myear**, and here are my answers:

> 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 believe that "the community" of SU is two parts: the people who come through asking questions, some of them staying, many of them not, and the people who stick around and begin to care about what SU is and work to maintain and improve that.

For the first set I take a generally kind and gentle approach, making sure that if we must send them on their way they are at least informed that it's because this isn't the place to get the best answer FOR THEM.

For the second, I check out Meta regularly and answer when I think I have something to add to the discussion. I've asked a question or two as well both about the mundane and one or two about more serious policy points. I like to think that I communicate and defend my points well, but that I also make it a point not to become personal or abrasive or attacking when engaging with someone I disagree with. I'll use humor to lighten what I think might be rising tension.

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

This morning while dealing with an audit report I made changes to a system and inadvertently made one change too many, causing issues for users. When I began seeing the problem reports I immediately began going back over changes I'd made and found the error and resolved it.

When I'm wrong, I'll admit it. I value human connection more than being right in most cases. Even online.

>  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?

They apparently didn't learn from their previous suspensions. They might be engaging with the site and being partly-positively valuable, but how many and who are they scaring off with their anti-social behavior?

If they're the right type they'll come back after their long suspension and be a good member. If they're not, they may be missed, but we'll survive and be better for it.

>  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?

Ummmmm...

I flag stuff. Sometimes it disappears, sometimes it doesn't. Frankly, they aren't super visible to me, and that's not really a problem. If they were super visible it might feel like the site is more managed than it is, or the management that happens might just be more apparent.

If there was one thing I could point to, it would be that perhaps more authoritative answers on Meta written by Mods might be helpful, especially as Meta is a place many people will look to for responses from the Mods.

But, at the same time, there aren't a lot of complaints in Meta and perhaps that's because this site is generally well administered.

So, Kudos to the Mods we have. Y'all are generally invisibly awesome! Or awesomely invisble. Or something like that.

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

If I REALLY REALLY REALLY believed that it there is value to the question, I'd probably try to find a creative alternative that the various parties are all OK with. At the same time, being unified with the other mods has a benefit too. Unless I was particularly and oddly attached to a specific questiona non grata I'd probably swallow my pride and move on.

>  6. What is your philosophy on moderation in Chat?

Use a light hand.

Live chat is a lighter medium. It's a much more connected community and there is a qualitatively different connection in chat than in main page of SU.

People might be in there to blow off, to hang with virtual buddies, and some to even ask questions. So long as they are not being actively offensive and anti-social I prefer to live and let live in live chat.

>  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?

It should generally be a matter of community consensus. SU is The Community and The Community is SU. I imagine there are topics that I'd prefer remain off-topic, and I'd make that argument if the case arose, and if I could not in good conscience bear Mod responsibility over a site that dealt with such questions, I'd have to step down.

>  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?

Yes it is a fundamental responsibility. Mods ought to be good examples of how new users should be interacted with, and how they and their questions should be coached and improved. A user who has a good experience will be inclined to come back. One who comes back enough could end up like me.

Come to think of it, not everyone must think that's a good outcome.

>  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 not consider it a problem. Some questions don't yet have answers. Some askers will never return to mark their questions answered.

That said, surfacing old questions, and especially those without any answers, could help bring some visibility and perhaps answers to a few of these.

>  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?

You missed a comma in the question.

Assuming these bots place the flagged questions into the existing review queues most of the time, I don't think it should greatly influence how I review or how I would moderate.

There are times I look at how others have voted on a review to help understand how others are perceiving it and clarify my own thoughts on it, but for most reviews I make each determination on my own, and would intend to do the same whether I'm a mod or not.