I'm putting myself forward for moderator simply because I believe I can help the community realize its potential.

Creating something successful takes work, and anyone who tells you that StackOverflow (the software) could be recreated in a weekend is quite simply mistaken. The care that went into designing and building the system is directly correlated with the strength of the resource that SO, and now StackExchange, has become. Similarly, the vision that the creators of the site have is also key to this success.

By the nature of the site, as questions are answered and the resource is built, so is a community. The better the harmony between the vision and the community, the more the site will thrive.

Moderators will not be responsible for creating a vision that the intended audience will be receptive to. Joel, Jeff and company and their feedback loop with the community (meta.stackoverflow.com) are responsible for this. Initiatives to improve understanding such as Real Questions Have Answers show this in action and are important steps in this process.

However, moderators do have the admittedly difficult job of keeping the community in line with the vision. The better a moderator is at his or her job, the higher chance that this will be a learning experience for the users, rather than a discipline experience.

To that end, I'm not an "inclusionist", or a "deletionist", or any other kind of -ist regarding questions and answers. I simply believe that the power to delete, close, etc. needs to be wielded carefully.

• There should be no "us vs. them" feeling.
• Rules should be applied consistently, but the message will need to adapt to the user and the circumstances.
• Salvaging questions through encouraging edits is a win for the user and a win for the long-term community. Borrowing a phrase from a user on SO, closing or deleting questions is a lose-meh.
• We're all learning. Where the rules/guidelines are gray, ask questions and help the user investigate, before acting.

While I believe I understand the purpose of the site well, I know my understanding is not perfect. That's partly due to a changing environment—subjective questions are new to StackExchange and there are bound to be some adjustments and rethinking along the way. I'm willing and able to adapt to that.

I believe in the SE system and its ability to make the Internet better. As a member of the site I strive to help it reach that goal. The potential is there, and as Mark Trapp said, it will take some navigators to help it achieve that. I believe that moderators can help the community become navigators as well, and with that harmony, we have the best chance of succeeding.

I'm putting myself forward for moderator simply because I believe I can help the community realize its potential.

Creating something successful takes work, and anyone who tells you that StackOverflow (the software) could be recreated in a weekend is quite simply mistaken. The care that went into designing and building the system is directly correlated with the strength of the resource that SO, and now StackExchange, has become. Similarly, the vision that the creators of the site have is also key to this success.

By the nature of the site, as questions are answered and the resource is built, so is a community. The better the harmony between the vision and the community, the more the site will thrive.

Moderators will not be responsible for creating a vision that the intended audience will be receptive to. Joel, Jeff and company and their feedback loop with the community (meta.stackoverflow.com) are responsible for this. Initiatives to improve understanding such as Real Questions Have Answers show this in action and are important steps in this process.

However, moderators do have the admittedly difficult job of keeping the community in line with the vision. The better a moderator is at his or her job, the higher chance that this will be a learning experience for the users, rather than a discipline experience.

To that end, I'm not an "inclusionist", or a "deletionist", or any other kind of -ist regarding questions and answers. I simply believe that the power to delete, close, etc. needs to be wielded carefully.

• There should be no "us vs. them" feeling.
• Rules should be applied consistently, but the message will need to adapt to the user and the circumstances.
• Salvaging questions through encouraging edits is a win for the user and a win for the long-term community. Borrowing a phrase from a user on SO, closing or deleting questions is a lose-meh.
• We're all learning. Where the rules/guidelines are gray, ask questions and help the user investigate, before acting.

While I believe I understand the purpose of the site well, I know my understanding is not perfect. That's partly due to a changing environment—subjective questions are new to StackExchange and there are bound to be some adjustments and rethinking along the way. I'm willing and able to adapt to that.

I believe in the SE system and its ability to make the Internet better. As a member of the site I strive to help it reach that goal. The potential is there, and as Mark Trapp said, it will take some navigators to help it achieve that. I believe that moderators can help the community become navigators as well, and with that harmony, we have the best chance of succeeding.

I'm putting myself forward for moderator simply because I believe I can help the community realize its potential.

Creating something successful takes work, and anyone who tells you that StackOverflow (the software) could be recreated in a weekend is quite simply mistaken. The care that went into designing and building the system is directly correlated with the strength of the resource that SO, and now StackExchange, has become. Similarly, the vision that the creators of the site have is also key to this success.

By the nature of the site, as questions are answered and the resource is built, so is a community. The better the harmony between the vision and the community, the more the site will thrive.

Moderators will not be responsible for creating a vision that the intended audience will be receptive to. Joel, Jeff and company and their feedback loop with the community (meta.stackoverflow.com) are responsible for this. Initiatives to improve understanding such as Real Questions Have Answers show this in action and are important steps in this process.

However, moderators do have the admittedly difficult job of keeping the community in line with the vision. The better a moderator is at his or her job, the higher chance that this will be a learning experience for the users, rather than a discipline experience.

To that end, I'm not an "inclusionist", or a "deletionist", or any other kind of -ist regarding questions and answers. I simply believe that the power to delete, close, etc. needs to be wielded carefully.

• There should be no "us vs. them" feeling.
• Rules should be applied consistently, but the message will need to adapt to the user and the circumstances.
• Salvaging questions through encouraging edits is a win for the user and a win for the long-term community. Borrowing a phrase from a user on SO, closing or deleting questions is a lose-meh.
• We're all learning. Where the rules/guidelines are gray, ask questions and help the user investigate, before acting.

While I believe I understand the purpose of the site well, I know my understanding is not perfect. That's partly due to a changing environment—subjective questions are new to StackExchange and there are bound to be some adjustments and rethinking along the way. I'm willing and able to adapt to that.

I believe in the SE system and its ability to make the Internet better. As a member of the site I strive to help it reach that goal. The potential is there, and as Mark Trapp said, it will take some navigators to help it achieve that. I believe that moderators can help the community become navigators as well, and with that harmony, we have the best chance of succeeding.

I'm putting myself forward for moderator simply because I believe I can help the community realize its potential.

Creating something successful takes work, and anyone who tells you that StackOverflow (the software) could be recreated in a weekend is quite simply mistaken. The care that went into designing and building the system is directly correlated with the strength of the resource that SO, and now StackExchange, has become. Similarly, the vision that the creators of the site have is also key to this success.

By the nature of the site, as questions are answered and the resource is built, so is a community. The better the harmony between the vision and the community, the more the site will thrive.

Moderators will not be responsible for creating a vision that the intended audience will be receptive to. Joel, Jeff and company and their feedback loop with the community (meta.stackoverflow.com) are responsible for this. Initiatives to improve understanding such as Real Questions Have Answers show this in action and are important steps in this process.

However, moderators do have the admittedly difficult job of keeping the community in line with the vision. The better a moderator is at his or her job, the higher chance that this will be a learning experience for the users, rather than a discipline experience.

To that end, I'm not an "inclusionist", or a "deletionist", or any other kind of -ist regarding questions and answers. I simply believe that the power to delete, close, etc. needs to be wielded carefully.

• There should be no "us vs. them" feeling.
• Rules should be applied consistently, but the message will need to adapt to the user and the circumstances.
• Salvaging questions through encouraging edits is a win for the user and a win for the long-term community. Borrowing a phrase from a user on SO, closing or deleting questions is a lose-meh.
• We're all learning. Where the rules/guidelines are gray, ask questions and help the user investigate, before acting.

While I believe I understand the purpose of the site well, I know my understanding is not perfect. That's partly due to a changing environment—subjective questions are new to StackExchange and there are bound to be some adjustments and rethinking along the way. I'm willing and able to adapt to that.

I believe in the SE system and its ability to make the Internet better. As a member of the site I strive to help it reach that goal. The potential is there, and as Mark Trapp said, it will take some navigators to help it achieve that. I believe that moderators can help the community become navigators as well, and with that harmony, we have the best chance of succeeding.