Simon André Forsberg

A question is flagged: Please delete this question - my boss has seen it and says it contains confidential code - he's freaking out and wants me to remove it, but I can't delete it. The question was asked 3 days before, it has 2 answers, one is accepted. How do you respond?

This is problematic because in one way, they have licensed it away already. I believe the Terms of Service are there for a reason. I would not simply remove it without asking any questions. I would start a personal chat with the user and direct them to the Stack Exchange team.

If they ask about it, I would give them several reasons for why I cannot simply remove the question (hard to verify if his claim about the boss is true, users spending time to help, other users gets reputation, other users would lose reputation, a possible future visitor would go without some extra knowledge...)

Overall, I believe this lies above my pay-grade. (Oh, wait, moderators don't get paid!)

What do you think about the new possibilities of migration coming with graduation? Graduation means we will get the ability to migrate questions away by community vote. It also means we may end up on the migration path of other sites. These user-migrations can be notoriously bad (see the old programmer's dilemma). I personally fear they will be. This means an additional moderation duty and quite possibly drama with other sites on the network... How would you address problems coming up with large-scale low-quality user migrations?

Just like we have been educating Stack Overflow users, thanks to the many comments that @Duga shares in chat, we might also need to educate Code Review users about what kind of questions belong on Stack Overflow. (Simply saying "This code doesn't work" is not enough, Stack Overflow wants specifics).

I think we should try having Stack Overflow as a migration target, maybe also Database Administrators or related sites. I am also willing to try having Code Review as a migration target on Stack Overflow. If we find that there are too many rejected migrations, or too many low-quality questions that get migrated overall, then I will push for removing that specific troubled migration path.

As a moderator on Code Review you will also become a moderator on all of chat.stackexchange.com - which has rooms for most sites (all except Stack Overflow and Meta.StackExchange). A heated discussion is flagged in "The Suspension" chat room which is associated with BridgeBuilding.stackexchange.com - there is swearing and name calling. What do you do?

First course of action will be to delete any offensive messages and kick users that cause problems. This will buy me some time to read up more on the situation and get in contact with site moderators. I will post in the chat room to clarify that I find the behavior unacceptable. If/When the users come back and continue to be offensive, I will gradually step up the actions to include suspending users from chat. I will start with short period suspensions, and as I read up more on the history of the chat room I might decide on longer suspensions.

If my investigation of the chat room history leaves me more concerned about the message quality in the room, then I will keep an eye or a half on that room for the upcoming weeks or months to make sure that things cool down.

A user has an issue with an action you, as moderator, took; calling you out on meta, a chat room, comments, or otherwise. How do you handle this?

Most importantly, I will try my best to remain calm. I will look at the action I took again, and try to see it from the user's perspective. Maybe I will see that I could have handled the situation better, in which case I will apologize and try to make it right. Otherwise, if I cannot find that I did anything wrong, I will try to explain my action, and ask the other moderators or the rest of the community about what they think about the situation.

Knowing the Code Review regulars, I think it is quite likely that they might have replied to the user before I had the chance to do so, but I still think it is important that the user hears something from me as well.

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 will look at the users history to see if this is something that has been going on for a while, or if it only started to happen recently. I will chat with the user privately for a bit to suggest the user to be a bit more careful with the comments, while still making sure the user feels appreciated for all the positive contributions he or she has made to the site.

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

I will ping the moderator and ask about it in chat. I will ask them about why it is closed/deleted, then I will tell them why I think it shouldn't have been. We might end up having a discussion about it, and if we continue to disagree I will suggest that we take it to meta to ask for community input.

"Moderators don't vote. They decide." Making binding decisions instead of voting will be a paradigm shift for nearly all of the nominees. How do you plan on making this adjustment?

When I notice that a question already have four close votes, only then will I use my close vote as if I were an ordinary user.

I will be more hesitant when I vote decide the fate of a question. Whenever I think that it is in a gray area, I will avoid closing a question. Earlier I could vote as I wanted to because my vote was just one of many, if I become a moderator I am not just one in the crowd of voters anymore. I will use my moderator hammer on questions that I find are clearly off-topic.

Instead of voting to close a question as I would have done if I wouldn't have been a moderator, I will be more likely to add a comment to clarify any possible concerns that I have over the question. I believe a good comment can be worth more than five close votes in the long term.

As one of the Revivalists, I have seen some users come through chat that are active and excited about Code Review, and they do well for months at a time, but then they drop off the face of the planet Code Review, sometimes they come back and some haven't come back yet. Are you in it for the long haul? Are you going to stick with us for the long haul? Are you ready to spend hours on Code Review, just for the love of the site? Are you Addicted to Code Review? How can you show us that you are serious about Code Review?

I already spend hours on Code Review, just for the love of the site. I have developed @Duga that has helped drastically in detecting bad suggestions to post on Code Review, probably one of the most popular bots on Stack Exchange. I have also developed a code to answer userscript and a Code Review Shield. I believe those things clearly show how serious I am about Code Review.

Code Review has approximately at 15-to-1 upvote-to-downvote ratio, nearly double Stack Overflow's approximate 8-to-1 ratio. As a moderator, you'll be regularly viewing the worst of the worst posts made to Code Review. Do you consider up and down voting of a moderation tool at all? Do you think you downvote enough questions? Do you think you upvote enough questions?

I consider up and downvoting as a moderation tool just like any other voting is (voting to close, voting to delete). About 10% of my votes are downvotes, most of those downvotes are on questions, I do think I downvote enough questions. With a total of more than 2700 votes on questions, I think I upvote enough questions as well.

Whenever I see a bad question, I downvote it (and/or vote to close). Recently, I have raised my requirements a bit for a question to be upvoted. I don't upvote questions just for the case of upvoting.

In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

Effective on what? Effective on moderating the site, I presume. (It will certainly not help me do the dishes any faster)

Instead of having to trouble moderators with my comment flags, I will get the enjoyment of handling other users' flags. I will know that every time I mark a flag as "helpful", I will help that user get one step closer to the shiny Marshal badge.

I will have more tools at my disposal to get an overview of the site and of specific users (both in chat and on the main site), which will help me either verify or contradict any suspicions that may arise about user behavior.