9

One of our moderators has become inactive for quite some time. In addition, soon I will spend less time on this site as I will prioritize a side project of mine. Therefore, we can easily arrange for an additional moderator on this site with 'SE Corporate'.

While in private beta, it is typically the present moderators which recommend additional moderators for the site. However, I feel the current site is healthy enough to attempt some sort of 'election' in the same vein as moderator elections on graduated sites.

Do you feel you have what it takes to help carry through the current vision for Psychology & Neuroscience? Do you have an opinion on where the site should be headed instead? If you would like to nominate yourself, reply to this post and:

  1. Introduce yourself;
  2. Explain how you feel you intend to contribute to the site as a moderator;
  3. Explain what you think the most important tasks of a moderator are;
  4. Explain what your main focus point(s) will be;
  5. What will being a moderator change to your behavior on this site?

Comments are encouraged if there are questions to the nominees.

  • Sounds good, if it's possible. I'll share the post on social media as well. – Jeromy Anglim Jul 22 '18 at 9:35
  • 3
    Well, realistically speaking I guess we are only considering users with experience on the site, so social media might not be needed. – Steven Jeuris Jul 22 '18 at 10:29
  • 1
    With that third vote, it is now a 'hot meta post' on the front page. :) We could still create an event for extra visibility, but let's first wait and see whether volunteers apply. – Steven Jeuris Jul 23 '18 at 10:30
  • Steven, will this be an add-on mod, or a replacement mod? I don't think Artem is around much, like once every few months or so. Imho, not enough to be modding a beta-site-in-need-of-improvement – AliceD Jul 24 '18 at 21:58
  • In practice, a replacement. But, I see no need to make a point out of replacing him. Unless, we want two new mods and need to argue for a replacement? – Steven Jeuris Jul 25 '18 at 7:43
  • 1
    2 weeks and only 1 candidate doesn't make for much of an election ... current mods: How much work is typically involved in this role? My availability would be limited initially, but will significantly improve next year. – Arnon Weinberg Aug 3 '18 at 16:13
  • 1
    @ArnonWeinberg We are used to things moving slow around here, no? :) It definitely doesn't take up too much time (it is a small site). Basically, you decide for yourself how much time you are willing to spend. I'm certain it takes less time than racking up 11k of rep on the main site though. :) (But, we would also not want to lose those contributions in spite of moderation ... content is still king.) In other words, I suggest you apply. Same goes for many other oldtimers here. – Steven Jeuris Aug 3 '18 at 16:47
7

I would very much like to see this site continue to grow and improve, and am happy to pitch in however I can.

Introduction:

I am a lay person with no professional experience in this field. I do have a Bachelors in Psychology from the University of Toronto in Canada, where I graduated with Honours and was on the Dean's List for scholastic achievement.

My participation on this forum has been limited by a full-time job, plus running my own business on top of that. However, I plan to retire from both next year, and hope to dedicate much of my free time going forward to science and technology, especially cognitive science.

Contributions:

Initially, my availability will continue to be limited, though I am already on the site daily (for over 3 years), answering questions (#3 overall), reviewing posts (#2 overall), and assisting as time permits. I also promote the site whenever I can to people I meet at local science meetups that I attend each week. Starting next year, I will have time to contribute in more ways, regardless of moderator duties.

Responsibilities:

Currently, a fairly small community of users contribute to the review queues, the meta site, and other administrative functions. As such, it is often necessary for moderators to step in where they might not be needed on more active sites. It is important then for unilateral moderator actions to be representative of what the community wants, and what is best for the site going forward. This is by no means an easy task, and requires being proactive as much as reactive.

Focus:

My main focus is on the quality of the site's content. As pointed out elsewhere, the Stack Exchange model works well for IT stacks where answers can be easily tested to see if they work as advertised, but suffers a significant shortcoming with stacks that are not easily verified, as OPs and voters may not be well equipped to evaluate accuracy. Combined with a site that is not very active, and much of the user community having limited expertise, there can frequently be highly voted and/or accepted but low quality answers. As such, I do believe that posts here need to be actively curated.

Pseudoscience: I would personally prefer to see this site (as any online reference) strive to improve the accuracy and validity of its content. I am well aware of the characterization of various areas of psychology as pseudoscientific, but my approach is - rather than accepting this as an established standard - to continually strive to improve. As such, one thing to expect from me, as alluded to elsewhere, is a greater emphasis on research quality and reduction of pseudoscience content. That said, communication is key, and I would always prefer to give the user community an opportunity to object to moderator actions before (and after) taking them.

  • 1
    I for one am happy to support you, unreservedly. My only "concern" is that your active hours will overlap with Steven's... and there's a "dead zone" in Europe's daylight as far as I can tell, since Alice has become less active. On the other hand, Steven was less active than Alice on average... so more active mods in American time zones are probably not a bad thing. :-) – Fizz Aug 4 '18 at 6:19
  • 1
    Thanks @Fizz :-) maybe the odd hours I keep will come in handy some day after all. – Arnon Weinberg Aug 4 '18 at 6:42
  • 1
    I like the focus you presented here a lot! Thanks for applying! – Steven Jeuris Aug 4 '18 at 7:18
5

The SE community team has been notified that we wish to appoint Arnon Weinberg as pro tem mod for this site. This, simply based on the gross vote score.

Thanks to both of the candidates to share their views to advance this site. Both are excellent candidates.

We'll keep you posted.

3

I wish to volunteer as moderator, and below is my submission as requested

Introduction

For those who don't know me, I have been a member of this site for 3 years, 5 months and I am qualified in Hypnotherapy and Psychotherapeutic Counselling through completing the relevant courses at Reading University. I have also been supporting those who have been raped, sexually assaulted and abused since the turn of the millenium.

I enjoy learning new things and my personal strengths include determination, ability and willingness to learn new things, generosity, and consideration for others.

As highlighted in a recent answer I posted, being a member of this site can often help with a portion of my required CPD hours as answering questions here keeps me on my toes with keeping up-to-date with latest research etc. so the continuance of this site is very beneficial to me. Plus debates in meta such as the validity of Freudian theory (see my extensive write-up on this) help me to constantly re-evaluate my position on the various theories within Psychology.

How I intend to contribute to the site as a moderator;

I intend to contribute mostly in the same way as I have done over the time I have been a member here. I am one of the most active members with regards to reviewing questions for editing or closing for being off-topic etc. and I have been very active answering the questions others have, as indicated by my 1 year reputation change level of 4,013 so far.

The only difference will be the fact that I can further directly assist the other moderators in their tasks to ensure this site runs as smoothly as possible.

What I think the most important tasks of a moderator are;

One of the main important tasks of a moderator is to ensure that everyone benefits from inclusive membership within the site. Ensurance that everyone follows the SE "be nice" policy, which is soon to be integrated into a full Code of Conduct after further consultation is a must.

Other important tasks include ensuring the collective decisions of the community within Psychology.SE is maintained with regard to what the scope of the site is and therefore what is considered on-topic, whilst keeping the site free from spam as much as possible.

How will being a moderator change my behavior on this site?

I cannot see being a moderator will change my behaviour. I will continue to be courteous to everyone and help every visitor equally.

Explain what your main focus point(s) will be;

My main focus will be to ensure every member enjoys being here and finds value in coming to the site, because without the visits by regular visitors as well as the casual visitors, this site would not be able to continue.

  • 2
    Thank you for your candidature, Chris! I know you as an extremely welcoming individual to newcomers on the site, so I fully agree with how you present yourself here. However, I do have to ask (and encourage you to elaborate): do you feel that there is a conflict between your primary research interests and what most people (or at least a large majority) on this site label as 'pseudoscience'? – Steven Jeuris Jul 24 '18 at 14:28
  • 1
    @StevenJeuris - I don't have any primary research interests as such. I follow all research within the boundaries of psychology. As for my standing on pseudoscience, there is a large chunk of so-called research which I do have trouble with accepting and therefore I consider them to be pseudoscientific. Take for example, anything within the metaphysical such as telepathy and ESP. The standpoint I take on "the pseudoscience of Freud" etc. can be seen within my answer at psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2248 and further at psychology.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2373/7604. – Chris Rogers Jul 24 '18 at 17:02
  • 1
    Where there is a large following within the field of psychology, it cannot be considered pseudoscientific within this site as you will be alienating all psychotherapeutic and integrative therapists; plus, as pointed out in my answer, 90% of psychological theory could be considered pseudoscientific due to the fact that they are non-falsifiable under Popper's requirements, cutting off Jung, Erikson, Skinner, Rogers, Perl.... you name them and they will be there. That would then narrow this site so much there would be no discussion of psychology. – Chris Rogers Jul 24 '18 at 17:02
  • 2
    I think it's a bit disingenuous to say you don't have primary research interests, though I think the rest of what you've written in your comments is suitable to answer the question Steven asked. – Bryan Krause Jul 24 '18 at 17:11
  • Do you pursue the effort of getting the site statistics up? What do you think of Garbage Valley? What should be done about it? – AliceD Jul 25 '18 at 22:01
  • 2
    Yes @AliceD. I have been trying to get the site statistics up. I have been actively looking at old unanswered questions and low voted answers to see what I can answer and what can be improved whilst also reviewing them for being broad etc. in which case I vote to close them. Garbage Valley has been a big problem for a long time by the looks of things and it is going to take a while, especially if few people are actively looking back at old questions and answers. Hopefully more people will do the same and over a good length of time which may help to get on top of it all more quickly. – Chris Rogers Jul 25 '18 at 22:09
  • 3
    Another point to mention is that sometimes it is better to provide a quick answer which gives some direction on further research by the OP when a question is broad. Take for example psychology.stackexchange.com/a/19666. I could have voted to close for being too broad but providing a suitable short answer (where possible) helps to give a few pointers whilst also helping towards the site stats. Win both ways. :-) – Chris Rogers Jul 25 '18 at 22:40
  • Looking back at my answers given to questions, there does seem to be a pattern to them which @BryanKrause may be referring to with regard my primary research interests. I wasn't intentionally being "disingenuous" but I can see there is a leaning with regard my particular knowledge areas towards pain, fear, trauma etc. which is to be expected when supporting those who suffered from abuse, rape and other trauma for so many years, however, other areas of psychology are definitely of interest to me which is where I was coming from when initially answering Steven's question – Chris Rogers Jul 25 '18 at 22:49
  • 3
    I noticed you add disclaimers sometimes, stating some consider the answer pseudoscience. I feel that is also a fine way of respecting both views, leaving it up to the OP to decide. But, to keep our more scientific image we have fought hard for to obtain, I do find it important to approach such questions as such. – Steven Jeuris Jul 26 '18 at 8:05
  • As long as you don't singlehandedly close questions as duplicate. Your judgement on that leaves much to be desired, IMHO. FYI: I didn't downvote your candidacy, somebody else did though, although I don't see above what concerns they might have. – Fizz Jul 31 '18 at 16:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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