<p>Sorry I am a bit late here. I was at a conference.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(1) What is your take on the "software questions on CV" that come up
  very frequently and where do you draw the line and decide it should be
  migrated to SO or simply closed? Based on the review queue, it seems
  there is a lot of heterogeneity among the high-rep users in terms of
  what constitutes "off-topic" in this context and, with moderators
  having the ability to unilaterally close/migrate questions, this seems
  a natural question to ask.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>My idea is that we should try to base migration on which set of users can better <em>answer</em> the question, rather than whether the question mentions a statistical package. If the question demands statistical knowledge (even if it also involves knowledge of a package) then I think it belongs here. If it does not demand such knowledge I would vote to migrate.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(2) If you are elected moderator, what (specific, concrete!) changes
  would you like to see made to the way the site is currently
  administered and moderated? How do you view your role in effecting the
  proposed changes?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I think the site in general is good. I would like to see a better way of welcoming newcomers. One thing would be that, when a person posts a question for the first time, they are directed to the FAQ automatically. They could get a message such as "thank you for asking a question on our site. Here is a FAQ about the site".</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(3) How would you moderate situations where you find yourself
  disagreeing with official SE policy about something?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I would discuss it with other moderators and perhaps other users in general in the meta.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(4) 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?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I don't think this is very likely, but I would take each person and each question separately. Useful answers should stay. However, if a person is generating flags (as opposed to arguments) and those flags are justified, then measures would have to be taken - first warning the person. But arguments can be good, if they are conducted civilly. Not all statistical questions are answerable in only one way.</p>

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

<p>If I felt it was serious I would discuss it with him/her.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(6) What are your opinions about casting the deciding "moderator" vote
  on closing/opening questions? For example, if five non-moderator users
  have closed a question that you think should be left open, would you
  consider unilaterally re-opening it? Similarly, if a majority of
  reviewers have recommended that a question be left open (say 1 close
  vote and 3 "stay open" votes) under what circumstances would you
  decide to use your deciding close vote to override the majority?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I'd be more willing to re-open a question than to close one against the majority of votes. I would only vote to close if the situation was pretty clear (e.g. a near exact duplicate). Having a "bad" question on the site (unless it is offensive or something like that) does less harm (in my view) than deleting a question that others will find useful. I would bear in mind that it can be hard to search for the right question in statistics, as the user may not know the right terms.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(7) What is your interpretation of the purpose of Cross Validated and
  how does this influence the way you choose to use the site as an
  ordinary user?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I think the primary purpose is to serve as a Q and A repository for all sorts of statistical and data analytic questions - from elementary to advanced, from purely data analytic to highly theoretical. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(8) What kind of moderatorial experience, if any, have you had before
  (online or offline)? Can you give an example of a moderatorial issue
  that came up, how you had handled it, and how the community that you
  moderated viewed your handling of the situation?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I have not had any such experience.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(9) 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?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I feel fine with it. When something of mine needs deletion (e.g. if someone else points out an error) I delete it. That would remain the same whether or not I become a moderator. I am not sure how different the light will be. I, personally, don't view statements from moderators differently, except in that all the moderators are clearly experienced people who consistently give good answers. But so do many non-moderators. </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(10) In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more
  effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I am not sure. I ran for moderator not to be more <em>effective</em> exactly, but in order to give more back to this community and help more people ask good questions and get good answers.</p>
