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?
I'll go with established policy here: do not migrate if the question is on topic for Super User. Migration would send a confusing and wrong message to the OP about what is considered on topic here. Super User is for questions about computer hardware and software and home networking, and OS X and bash questions are entirely within this scope.
If the question is not getting no answers or poor answers from the community, I may post a comment suggesting that it may be better on another site, making sure that the user is advised not to cross-post:
While your question is on topic for Super User, you may get better answers if you posted it on [site]. If you prefer, you can delete this question and repost it there, or you can raise a moderator flag asking me to move it there for you. However, please don't cross-post the same question on multiple sites.
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?
I normally consider established policy to be a standard which should be followed as much as possible so that the community can rely on it. If I disagree with a policy for a particular situation, I would try to evaluate all options and explain in detail, either by a comment or in a Meta post, why I made a particular decision. If I disagree with a policy in general, I would bring it up on Meta for further discussion with the community to determine whether it is a good idea to change it. Moderators represent their communities, so I will always seek community input before making any major policy changes.
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?
In the event of a dispute, I would evaluate the actions taken by the involved parties and weigh them against policy and the circumstances behind the dispute. If it is clear that a user is acting in an uncivil matter, I will probably post a comment asking the user to stop and delete any messages that are obviously offensive or are flagged by the community. In more serious cases, I may delete some or all of the comments in the argument without them being flagged and move the discussion to Meta to obtain community input.
Where the subject of the dispute is of a borderline nature (such as a question which can be seen as both on- and off-topic), I will exercise caution in making a decision and may seek community input via Meta, knowing that the statements I make as a moderator can have a substantial long-term impact on the site.
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 have always taken the quality of my contributions very seriously, so I'm not particularly concerned about that. If anything, I will only take my words even more seriously.
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.
Most questions which in some way intrinsically involve a computer (whether a desktop, laptop, Windows 8 tablet, or home server) or equipment used primarily with computers (including keyboards, mice, printers, scanners and other peripherals) are on topic, with certain notable exceptions such as for questions primarily involving programming or shopping recommendations. Generally, questions about other devices such as smartphones and DVRs are off-topic unless a computer is integral to the question.
If a question is mainly about a non-"computer" device but intrinsically involves a computer in a non-obvious way (which I've run into several times), I may edit the question to make it clearer that a computer is involved or post a comment advising users not to vote to close to avoid confusion. For devices which behave like traditional computers but differ in significant ways (such as PC-based embedded systems), I will generally decide based on whether the question is of a nature which can be accurately answered by the Super User community and how similar the device is to traditional computers.
In borderline cases, such as using Python scripts to automate system maintenance or other administrative tasks, I will prefer not to move the question unless the community believes otherwise. Once again, I may use Meta for community input before making a final decision.
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'd probably start by posting a comment reply to one of that user's comments, like the following:
@user, you've contributed great answers to Super User, but many of your recent comments have tended to be argumentative or were flagged by the community. We expect all users to be civil here, so please be nice and stay on topic. For guidance, see the help center.
If the behavior continues after several similar comments have been made, I would send a moderator message to the user about the issue. As an (absolute) last resort, I may suspend the user for one to seven days, depending on how disruptive the user has been.
7. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
I would bring it up in chat to discuss with the moderator who took that action and see how the community responds. If the best action to take is still unclear, I'll solicit community input on Meta as appropriate.
8. What will you do to breathe life back into
Kronos'sthe Super User Blog?
I would try to suggest topics which may be of interest to the Super User audience, and give the blog a more prominent place in the sidebar. Topics may include notable posts and major events in the computer world. If time permits, I may draft a blog post and submit it for review.
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?
In a situation like this, I would probably give a moderator warning to the user about how the content isn't offensive, based on the content in the profile and my interpretation of the rules. The flags will be marked invalid. If the user continues to raise meritless flags, I would suspend the user for one to seven days (or possibly longer if necessary).
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.
At present, I would add a comment to the new user's post explaining the problem, then vote to close or flag as required. I maintain a set of boilerplate comments which I customize as required to politely and accurately notify the user about the issue, and plan to expand these comments as needs evolve.
As a moderator, I would continue to post such comments as before. Questions which should be closed will be closed immediately, but I won't delete them immediately unless completely unsalvageable. Answer posts that are not answers will be deleted quickly, but not before the user is notified about the issue through a comment.