# NewAlexandria

Hello all!  [Nomination post here][1]

It's been engaging to answer all the questions here, and the meta and commenting.  Looking forward to your votes.


> 1. 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 have tended to see this kind of person wants to contribute, and just needs help to stay golden.  With talk in chat or another kind of DM, usually there's a good middle ground. It's important to identify if the arguing is part of their MO/agenda.  If it cannot be corrected I do think there has to be a line.  An intelligent and argumentative used can scare away others because of the charisma involved.


> 2. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?

With mod differences, Meta questions can be a great way to clarify what the community feels is best. Ideally no mod has problems discussing things in open forum.  Where the issue may be sensitive, chat or other DMs.

> 3. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

I think that moderators set precedents, create consistency, and promote things that aid the growth of the community. 


> 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 always presume that I'm being viewed in this light; the diamond just makes it more likely that people will read that public history.

> 5. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

I like to clean things up; mod status makes this easier.  Same as with question #2, I like to post these changes as proposals in meta, to garner feedback.  It's a volunteer job, so is best to all be in agreement befofe using the time. 

> 6. Law Stack Exchange has long struggled with the allowance or otherwise of questions seeking legal advice on specific matters, where answers can risk breaching laws against the unlicensed practice of law. Do you believe the current policies and practices on this matter are sufficient? Are these being appropriately executed? What changes would you like to say, and push for, if given moderator authority and tools (including any you have previously or currently raised)?

I think that we could be more consistent with providing a mod-comment that suggests better ways to ask the question so as to avoid seeking legal advice.  This may take some discussion via chat, or meta, to coordinate the kinds of feedback that seem to be working

This is in lieu of having more-semantically-worded flags, beyond just "off-topic."   Add more options with flagging a post is the ideal, because everyone tacitly learns the target, via how is worded.   Then we could reflect on what Q&A and getting these flags, and whether others should have, too.  The aim of this is to find new ways to support great Q&A.  Same for answers that some may see as crossing a line for giving directed advice. We could also change the help pages to reflect these community flags. 


I'll update with comments, rather than replying to each comment inline. 

  [1]: https://law.stackexchange.com/election/2#post-43656