1

Stack Exchange’s position is that every site has a team of moderators to operate in our network. Currently, this community is being moderated by apsillers and MadHatter, who have been doing an excellent job. We recently attempted to hold an election for your community in October.

Unfortunately, we only had the two current moderators nominate themselves, while we require four nominations in total. Members of an SE site being willing to step up as moderators has been the primary threshold for keeping a site alive since we created this policy in January 2015. Without that, a site is in danger of being shut down. Today, I am posting on behalf of the Community Management team to discuss the next election for this site. In order for a future election to be successful, there need to be community members who are eligible to serve as moderators who are willing to step up to the plate.

Next Steps

We are going to recommend waiting until April 2024 before setting up another election for this site. We’ll be looking for additional individuals to nominate themselves as moderators to join the team. This next election will help to bring those folks in. If we can’t find at least four people willing to nominate themselves to be a moderator on this site by that time, it gives the site an uncertain future.

Do you have any questions about the election process, or any concerns keeping you from nominating yourself as a moderator? Let us know, and we’ll do our best to address them.

0

1 Answer 1

5

You write that "members of an SE site being willing to step up as moderators has been the primary threshold for keeping a site alive since we created this policy in January 2015 [...] If we can’t find at least four people willing to nominate themselves to be a moderator on this site by that time, the site is at risk of shutting down", but the article you link to in support of this says the bright-line test for closure is

If there's enough moderation for a public beta site to consistently remain free of spam, for flags to be cleared, and for our Code of Conduct to be upheld, your site will remain open.

That is to say, the test is not whether there are a certain arbitrary number of moderators, but whether a sufficient amount of moderation is happening. So could I ask for clarification as to the actual policy under which we'll be judged?

3
  • 1
    Site closure has only happened once, and that was for Windows Phone. In short, the determination to start a discussion for a site closure only begins if the existing mods ask for it or there are no mods, and multiple elections have failed completely. Even at that point, it still has a ways to go. Our default position is we don't want to close sites unless there is no other option.
    – SpencerG StaffMod
    Nov 14, 2023 at 15:14
  • 1
    That's good to hear, and is a little less climactic than what you said in Next Steps above. Thank you.
    – MadHatter Mod
    Nov 14, 2023 at 15:21
  • Yeah, that language probably isn't the best for the first go-around of a failed election. I will make a note to adjust it.
    – SpencerG StaffMod
    Nov 14, 2023 at 15:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .