Example Situations with another Moderator

For the "another moderator" questions I'll first answer what I'd want to happen if I were the moderator. As I go into most situations thinking what would I want if the role were reversed.

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

I'd want the moderator to undo my action and let the situation be handled by unelected moderators. We can then see what the community feels is the correct course of action. Sometimes I'm wrong, so a quick ping in the 1st with a short explanation may clean up everything. Otherwise, if I still think the action should be taken, I'd then have the option to comment on the post explaining why.

I think escalating to meta should be a last resort. As the situation can be handled without meta.

If the current situation is the first disagreement between me and another moderator I'd want to establish a sort of policy. The aim is for us to discuss how best to handle conflicts taking into account each other's quirks. I'd then follow the agreed upon policy.

In the very unlikely case we can't build a policy, I'd ask for another moderator's opinion. We can then resolve the situation however the majority decides. If we still can't decide on a resolution then meta seems like the only viable option.

3. You notice that a moderator on Code Review is not active very often, or when they are active, they do only the minimal amount of moderation, they do not participate often in codereview.meta.stackexchange.com and may not even have visited the meta site in some weeks.

   Is this a concern? What, if anything, should be done to get them to "pull their weight"?

I take breaks from Code Review every now and then. We all need breaks as we can all get fatigued. If site activity increases whilst I'm on a break, unless I have a life situation currently going on, a ping may get me back and ready to go.

One thing I've learnt from previous moderators is; moderators come in all shapes and sizes. As such I think division of labour based on everyone's interests and skills is good amongst the moderator team. As such if another moderator is not active on meta when I am, what's the problem?

Yes. I'd be concerned for the well being of the other moderator. For the most part I wouldn't want to make a scene, so I'd leave things for time to fix. However if the moderator team is currently being stretched thin; I think the moderator's duty to the site are more important than the problems a difficult conversation could create.

Ultimately I'd want to be understanding of life situations. And would prefer to have an amicable solution if possible. For example; could we pick up the slack or could we get an additional mod?

Moderator Role

4. Moderators have a role that is much closer aligned to Stack Exchange as a corporation than the role of "just another high-rep user". This can mean enforcing policies that you'd like to see implemented differently, lobbying for change in those policies or any number of interactions that are not available to "your normal everyday user".

   What do you think of that prospect?

   If you could change one policy (be it SE-wide or CR), which would that be and why?

I have opinions on everything and anything. If you post a question on meta; I will magically have an opinion. Some of my opinions are good, some terribly bad. And meta is there to filter the best opinions into policies.

However being opinionated doesn't stop me from following policies. Doesn't matter where the policy came from or my opinions, just as long as the policy exists. If I have an opinion I should go to meta.

I've pioneered a few policies before. But if I had to propose a new one I'd try to solve the following situation. Sometimes Mast and I discuss some of the more boring topics - say tags. After a discussion we design a tagging scheme. Unfortunately a moderator isn't around to make the scheme a reality. Which leaves me a little disheartened.

As such I think a concrete policy for raising meta issues to moderators would be helpful. Whilst chasing in chat is possible, I feel icky afterwards. As such I'd be interested in building a policy where any user could add [meta-tag:mod-review] to a question to raise a meta post for me to handle. At the current time I think some soft 'rules' around the tag would also be a benefit. Rules allowing maximum feedback from the community, and to reduce confrontations around how I handle a post.

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

On main having moderator privileges would allow me to quickly handle situations like a bad question going hot, obsolete comments, handling non-answers and suspicious user activity. Having moderator privileges would only really make the outcome of my actions happen faster. For the most part I would still have the same effect on the site.

However looking at meta I'd be able to raise issues to Stack Exchange, edit moderator only parts of the site and make the outcome of meta discussions a reality. Sometimes I can't get a moderator to use these privileges. So being a moderator would open the door to more possibilities for me. And I'd hope [meta-tag:mod-review] would allow me to open the door for non-moderators too.

7. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

To me a moderator is a normal highly active user who looks after the site. And just so happens to have a privilege to handle exceptional circumstances.

The moderator team is then a diverse set of such users. Who individually try to look after the site in their own unique ways. Whilst being a core part of the community.

5. Moderating on SE is much more than just wielding a mighty hammer, zapping spammers and wearing a cool hat. As a moderator, the community will be looking up to you, and ideally following your footsteps - you'll be some kind of a role model here.

   Are you planning to take a leadership role in the continuous building of this community, keeping it active, vibrant, appealing to reviewers / would-be reviewers / reviewees?

   If so, how? If not, why?

Yes, I'd continue acting in the leadership role I already have. As a user in the top 10 for [meta-tag:discussion] I have; put forward and debated policies with other users, helped guide users on what our rules mean and have explained why questions are off-topic plenty of times before. I believe meta greatly effects the site as a whole. And I hope having a moderator who's primary focus is meta can help revitalize meta after the blow to activity we've had since COVID-19.

8. 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've been told on a number of different occasions I post thorough and great answers. So for the most part I feel great! Whilst I try my best to be my best all the time, sometimes I, like everyone, fail. I understand well the light a moderator's actions are seen in. So I'd like to spread the positive ones as much I can.

Example Situations

6. Moderators on Code Review automatically become moderators on the Stack Exchange chat system. The chat system includes Code Review and all Stack Exchange sites except Stack Overflow.

   A user on chat has posted a message that has been flagged as rude or abusive on a board related to the hypothetical, but obviously "controversial" or "polarizing" site flatearth.stackexchange.com.

   What actions do you take?

Same thing we always do Pinky. Try to take over the world! Try to get people to disengage. When I have the chance to act on 10k chat flags my current workflow is;

1. open the transcript of the chat,
2. mark the flag however I think is best,
3. read the transcript for context,
4. ask the users to disengage, and
5. monitor the chat for a period of time.

I plan to treat mod chat flags and 10k chat flags the same way I currently do for 10k flags. At the current time the only way I'd like to change is to get better skills at getting emotionally charged users to disengage.

In practice, I've gotten to 4 once. As many other users handle chat flags faster than I do.

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?

The example is really situational. An (elected/unelected) moderator generating lots of "No Longer Needed" flags should probably be fine.

Personally I think Code Review has a high duty calls factor. If you know two languages you probably know at least two different styles. The best case I've seen when comments turn into an argument is the two users agreeing to just stop and cleaning up the comments. So in my opinion most arguments can just be nuked from orbit.

Additionally if the user is breaking any rules or the CoC I'd have more work to do. If I think the user is being rude I may need to double check with another moderator, as I don't want to overreact. If the user has a pattern of being rude a private chat may be enough to fix the problem. If the problem continues then other moderator privileges would have to be used.

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?

First, I would encourage any users in a discussion to take it into a private chat room. I would also remind them of Stack Exchanges “Be Nice” policy. If the discussion continued to deteriorate, I would suggest to one or more users that they take a break from the site to cool down, and then finally if necessary, I would suspend one or more users for a day to cool down.

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

I would invite the other moderator into a private chat room and discuss the issue with them. If we did not come to a consensus about the issue then I would discuss it with all the other moderators on the community, and let the majority opinion be the decision. I might also ask former moderators what their opinions were to get the guidance of their experience.

3. You notice that a moderator on Code Review is not active very often, or when they are active, they do only the minimal amount of moderation, they do not participate often in codereview.meta.stackexchange.com and may not even have visited the meta site in some weeks. Is this a concern? What, if anything, should be done to get them to "pull their weight"?

Each moderator will have their individual strengths and weaknesses, some may have more time to participate then others, sometimes real life is going to interfere with a moderator’s ability to participate in the community. Going in as a moderator I would discuss with the other moderators of the community what they considered their strengths and weaknesses were and then possibly suggesting that we divide the moderation tasks according to those strengths.

In the event that I felt a moderator was not pulling their weight I would first ask the moderator if there were any issues preventing them from participating actively in the community, and what the duration of that issue would be. If it was a long-term issue, I would then consult with the other moderators and former moderators in the community about what we should do as a community.

4. Moderators have a role that is much closer aligned to Stack Exchange as a corporation than the role of "just another high-rep user". This can mean enforcing policies that you'd like to see implemented differently, lobbying for change in those policies or any number of interactions that are not available to "your normal everyday user". What do you think of that prospect? If you could change one policy (be it SE-wide or CR), which would that be and why?

Stack Exchange is a business that supports all the communities by providing the servers and services that support these communities. For us to continue to have online communities they need to stay in business, therefore I will support their policies as best I can. I am not a yes man, so I will raise any issues I see and encourage any changes that I think will benefit the Code Review Community. Each community may have its own rules and policies that I will enforce as necessary.

As a moderator elected by the Code Review Community it would be my responsibility to represent the community at a higher level if necessary, so for any pending policy changes or requests to change policy I will notify the 2nd monitor and open questions on Code Review Meta for input.

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.

5. Moderating on SE is much more than just wielding a mighty hammer, zapping spammers and wearing a cool hat. As a moderator, the community will be looking up to you, and ideally following your footsteps - you'll be some kind of a role model here. Are you planning to take a leadership role in the continuous building of this community, keeping it active, vibrant, appealing to reviewers / would-be reviewers / reviewees? If so, how? If not, why? Borrowed from Mathieu Guindon

To the extent possible by a regular user, I have already started taking a leadership role by regularly going through the review queue, posting comments in the review queues for almost every post that has quality issues if a comment hasn’t already been posted, sometimes editing a post to remove the quality issue as well as posting a comment for future reference. While I haven’t earned my Marshall badge yet, I do have 410 helpful flags. I also participate daily in the 2nd Monitor chatroom. I do need to become more active in Code Review Meta. I will also do my best to encourage more users to get involved in the review queues. Having a mighty hammer concerns me because it means I can close a question with one vote and therefore need to be much more careful about close votes.

6. Moderators on Code Review automatically become moderators on the Stack Exchange chat system. The chat system includes Code Review and all Stack Exchange sites except Stack Overflow. A user on chat has posted a message that has been flagged as rude or abusive on a board related to the hypothetical, but obviously "controversial" or "polarizing" site flatearth.stackexchange.com. What actions do you take?

First, I would look to see if one of the moderators for the flatearth.stackexchange.com sites was online and if they were I would let them handle it. If no moderator for the site was available then I would have to bring myself up to speed on the communities’ rules before acting, what may be offensive on one site may not be offensive on another site, especially a “controversial” or “polarizing” site. I would have to remove my own biases before performing any action. I might have to request assistance from a Stack Exchange wide moderator site.In your opinion, what do moderators do?

7. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

I believe strongly in the Stack Exchange Theory of Moderation which states that the community basically moderates itself. Moderators should provide support and leadership for this self-moderation. Probably the most important thing moderators do is support the community in self-moderation by responding to flags by the members of the community and addressing the issues they find if necessary. After that moderators should provide guidance to members of the community by asking or answering questions about relevant issues in the community’s Meta section. Moderators should point out what rules are enforceable by the community and what rules should be reconsidered. Removing spam and offensive comments is obviously part of the daily routine.

8. 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?

This is concerning about existing comments and answers, there may be answers and comments I posted years ago (prior to certain Stack Exchange policy changes) that I may have to edit or remove. I will watch my tone in comments and answers in the future as I have done since I started spending time in the 2nd Monitor.In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?

9.      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 have 16k rep already, and have access to many of the moderation tools. What will make me more effective is having access to moderator chatrooms and being able to discuss issues with other moderators. I already discuss issues in the 2nd Monitor, however, I don’t have guidance from Stack Exchange wide moderator chatrooms.

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?

Typically, this is a situation where you have to try and de-escalate the situation, suggesting to the user they go and cool down. Across the SE network, we use 24-hour suspensions with a "cool down" reason because they've caused a lot of arguments or rudeness and it's caused strain on the sites in question. Usually, I would act with a 24-hour suspension and a moderator message to the user indicating that they're causing a lot of arguments and strife, and suggest that they take a day to cool down as we all tend to get heated sometimes and we just need a break. And of course, clean up the arguments in comments where possible.

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

This has happened before to me many times on Ask Ubuntu. Typically, I'd bring this up with the moderator in question and ask for clarification as to why they closed it - in Ask Ubuntu we have a moderator discussion chat room for this type of thing - and then keep my mind open to why they closed it. If I disagree, I usually discuss this civilly with the moderator, or if necessary open a separate Meta thread about this for global discussion.

3. You notice that a moderator on Code Review is not active very often, or when they are active, they do only the minimal amount of moderation, they do not participate often in codereview.meta.stackexchange.com and may not even have visited the meta site in some weeks. Is this a concern? What, if anything, should be done to get them to "pull their weight"?

This is definitely a concern, however you have to be careful. In this time of COVID, there could be many reasons this is the case - illness, corona-depression, etc. Typically, I would reach out to the moderator where possible and first make sure they're alright. If, however, there's no response to that and they do the absolute bare minimum in terms of moderation, I usually go to the Community Managers who have some extra tools and contact mechanisms to get in touch with the moderator to see what's going on. Unfortunately, 'getting them to pull their weight' is not a task for a single moderator on their own, but a task for the full team, and when necessary the Community Managers across the SE network. If they consistently do the bare minimum and not enough to be considered active, we would urge that moderator to mark themselves as inactive/away and define the reason. If it continues to be a problem beyond that, then the CMs get involved, and possibly another election for new moderators needs to be done. (Moderator *removal* is rare, but getting new moderators to support the team is still doable.)

4. Moderators have a role that is much closer aligned to Stack Exchange as a corporation than the role of "just another high-rep user". This can mean enforcing policies that you'd like to see implemented differently, lobbying for change in those policies or any number of interactions that are not available to "your normal everyday user". What do you think of that prospect? If you could change one policy (be it SE-wide or CR), which would that be and why?

I've always enforced the policies of a site or an SE-wide rule as the policies are written. When it should be changed, I raise a post on the relevant Meta - either a site specific meta and raise a proposal to change a policy and then wait for the community at large to either support/reject the policy, or when it's an SE-wide policy I raise that on the StackExchange meta and leave it there for a vote or for SE to say "sorry no". I've always enforced the rules where written (with an even-handed approach), and always when wanting to change a policy propose changes on the relevant Meta (recent case in point: Ask Ubuntu and narrowing the scope of 'supported Ubuntu releases' to have the end of standard support date per Canonical as the death date if it's sooner than the actual End of Life date because of "Extended Security Maintenance" releases - the proposal, the action after overwhelming support)

5. Moderating on SE is much more than just wielding a mighty hammer, zapping spammers and wearing a cool hat. As a moderator, the community will be looking up to you, and ideally following your footsteps - you'll be some kind of a role model here. Are you planning to take a leadership role in the continuous building of this community, keeping it active, vibrant, appealing to reviewers / would-be reviewers / reviewees? If so, how? If not, why? Borrowed from Mathieu Guindon

Absolutely! While my activity up until now has been low due to the huge massive task of my full time job getting every single employee working properly on Work From Home, that task is mostly finished. As such, I have time and energy to put towards this community, in helping to build it, keep it active, and keep it appealing to reviewers and reviewees, both current and would-be. Moderators are leaders, not just janitors, and it is crucial that a moderator be able to be in a leadership position and role, not just swinging the hammer and wearing diamond hats.

6. Moderators on Code Review automatically become moderators on the Stack Exchange chat system. The chat system includes Code Review and all Stack Exchange sites except Stack Overflow. A user on chat has posted a message that has been flagged as rude or abusive on a board related to the hypothetical, but obviously "controversial" or "polarizing" site flatearth.stackexchange.com. What actions do you take?

I'm going to be quite blunt here - I've been a chat wide moderator since 2016 with my diamond on Ask Ubuntu. Specific to the chat system, I specifically manage moderation with an objective look on a topic per the overarching rules of conduct (including the "Be Nice" rule!) on the SE network.

First step is analyze the situation, read the scrollback and the relevant items that triggered the discussion. If the post is flagged but has not violated any rules, I typically just decline the flag but hang around in case things get out of hand (either with arguments or with what I call 'flag storms' where someone continues to submit flags just because they disagree with an issue). Normally, in the cases where an argument continues to get out of hand, I nudge them with a "Hey, please stop the arguing and change the topic, thank you!" message. If it continues beyond that, then I either chat-suspend the users for a short time to cool down (and inform that site's moderators it happened), or in much more severe cases where the chat room is actually just a cesspool of fighting freeze it, and then inform that site's moderators. There's numerous instances of me having to do that in the past, but I usually save the heavy moderation actions for only when necessary.

7. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderators have many roles. From enforcement of rules and cleanup of sites (janitorial duties, judge/jury of infractions), to site promoters and supporting the community the site surrounds, Moderators do a little bit of everything. We are not just 'janitors' or 'rule enforcers', we are required to uphold a 'gold standard' of what good interaction with the site should be, and we should especially keep in mind the community's needs. That includes keeping the site a welcoming atmosphere, contributing positively despite having the diamond, and provide suggestions to new users to how to improve rather than just blindly sweep them under the rug.

8. 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?

Happened to me over on Ask Ubuntu since 2016. I've grown accustomed to old posts being seen in a different light, though since my activity in 2014 and beyond on Ask Ubuntu, I've improved greatly with my posts. Since that type of 'improved posting' has been brought over to here when I joined CR after my time on Ask Ubuntu, I don't have any problems with any posts her on Code Review of mine being seen in a different light. In fact, I welcome it - any notes and criticism from my old posts getting extra attention is welcome, and the diamond here on Code Review posts of mine simply reinforces that I know what I'm doing with regards to the site, but not in a way that "I am better than you" - when it comes to answers and questions, none of us as moderators are 'better than others' and our posts just continue to reflect this over time. Including our increasing expertise where relevant because of our growth as coders and developers thanks to the support of others!

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

Reaching 10k or 20k rep helps by unlocking additional tools and question protection, but being a moderator requires more than the tools, it requires a commitment to wanting to keep the site active and a good welcoming place. To that end, as I strongly support the CR site, a diamond will allow that leadership role to be cemented, and will allow me as well as any other new moderators to help guide the community with the extra attention the diamonds bring. As said before, we are janitors and judges, but not just that, we're leaders who have to strive to guide the site to keep it on track and a good welcoming place. The diamond will help me to do that, as well as undertake the other roles.

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?

The first thing I would do would confer with other moderators to see if any action has already happened or been planned. If further action is required I would suggest having a moderator invite the user to chat in an individual room and request they review the code of conduct.

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

I would first corroborate with moderators, hopefully including the mod who took the action, and attempt to prove that the action shouldn’t have been done and/or should be reversed if possible.

3. You notice that a moderator on Code Review is not active very often, or when they are active, they do only the minimal amount of moderation, they do not participate often in codereview.meta.stackexchange.com and may not even have visited the meta site in some weeks. Is this a concern? What, if anything, should be done to get them to "pull their weight"?

I know that we all have things that can occupy our time, and even vacations/holidays/etc. can span multiple weeks/months. If such an event did occur I would corroborate with other moderators and perhaps devise a plan like attempting to communicate with the less-active moderator, possibly setting a timeframe for when further action may be necessary.

4. Moderators have a role that is much closer aligned to Stack Exchange as a corporation than the role of "just another high-rep user". This can mean enforcing policies that you'd like to see implemented differently, lobbying for change in those policies or any number of interactions that are not available to "your normal everyday user". What do you think of that prospect? If you could change one policy (be it SE-wide or CR), which would that be and why?

I would learn to enforce policies as would be required of me.

A moderator pulled me into a chat room once and requested I read the CR meta about the first posts queue, which I likely hadn’t seen prior to that point. It did seem like a shock since there was nothing in the queue that led to this meta post. I considered posting on meta SE requesting a feature to allow sites to link from the review queues to a meta post like that but figured the idea wasn’t fully ironed out (e.g. would it show at a certain time before a user started in the queue? Would it be in a modal or on the side?) and likely would be denied. However as a moderator I might be able to get such a change request accepted.

5. Moderating on SE is much more than just wielding a mighty hammer, zapping spammers and wearing a cool hat. As a moderator, the community will be looking up to you, and ideally following your footsteps - you'll be some kind of a role model here. Are you planning to take a leadership role in the continuous building of this community, keeping it active, vibrant, appealing to reviewers / would-be reviewers / reviewees? If so, how? If not, why? Borrowed from Mathieu Guindon

I typically like to get on-board with community-building missions. While I regret not being a member during the original zombie hunting missions from 5+ years ago I still like to take zombies out whenever I can. I would take a role in promoting community growth - not just in hunting zombies. I could create a meta post or committee to devise tactics to keep the community active (e.g. having some users offer bounties on unanswered questions, developing "fun" activities, etc.).

6. Moderators on Code Review automatically become moderators on the Stack Exchange chat system. The chat system includes Code Review and all Stack Exchange sites except Stack Overflow. A user on chat has posted a message that has been flagged as rude or abusive on a board related to the hypothetical, but obviously "controversial" or "polarizing" site flatearth.stackexchange.com. What actions do you take?

I would examine the post, as well as the transcript before the message to gain context. If it seems rude or abusive then I would join the room to see if any user has handled the message. If it hasn't been handled then I would warn the user and check with a room owner to see if they believe it should be deleted or if no room owner/manager is able to do so then I would delete the message.

7. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Based on what I have read on meta as well as interactions I've had with moderators in chat and on the main site, I know that moderators are in charge of a few things - including handling most of the flags raised by community members, as well as resolving other disputes, determining if posts should be migrated from other sites and interacting with SE CMs about various matters (e.g. requesting user account merges).

There was a question above that started "Moderating on SE is much more than just" so that also indicates that moderators are looked to for leading the community in growth and keeping it clean. I would continue to edit posts when I see something that needs cleaning up. I don't claim to be on par with Jamalizing but I can do what I can.

8. 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 would be proud to have the distinction of the highest level privilege next to my name. There aren't really any posts that I am ashamed of.

9. 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 feel that if I spot a post that is blatantly off-topic then I could close it without needing to wait for others in the close-vote queue to process it. Sometimes off-topic questions do receive answers - often by new users looking to earn reputation and I could help mitigate this.

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?

First and foremost, my priority would be to understand the nature of answer. Why are is there an argument? Is the answer respectable? Does it meet the community guidelines? If the answer does not meet those criteri then I would ask the person to follow the guidelines, be nice to others and change the language of the answer. Now if the person is not responding as requested then I would take appropriate actions authorized to the moderator. In case of the answer is abusive, racist of provocative then I would immediately discuss with other community members and act immediately.

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

I would discuss with the moderator about it. I am sure he/she might have considered it and have put up a justifiable answer for the action. I would review the argument made and put a valid reason how I feel about the question. And would try to find a reasonable solution. Overall we are a part of community and take the best course ahead.

3. You notice that a moderator on Code Review is not active very often, or when they are active, they do only the minimal amount of moderation, they do not participate often in codereview.meta.stackexchange.com and may not even have visited the meta site in some weeks. Is this a concern? What, if anything, should be done to get them to "pull their weight"?

Yes, as a moderator is a huge responsibility. But we all have our day, good and bad. Situations change. So I would try to connect with the moderator and understand her/his situation. We cannot force anyone to do some community service and this is a community service. If the person is really having it hard to find time then I would help them find a better way to stay as part of the community, which necessarily might not be as a moderator for now.

4. Moderators have a role that is much closer aligned to Stack Exchange as a corporation than the role of "just another high-rep user". This can mean enforcing policies that you'd like to see implemented differently, lobbying for change in those policies or any number of interactions that are not available to "your normal everyday user". What do you think of that prospect? If you could change one policy (be it SE-wide or CR), which would that be and why?

I see moderator as a facilitator first. In the course of moderation, there might be some higher privileges but that does not mean superiority or expertise in anyways. But more of a helping hand to make the community more fun to be a part of with a great learning experience. I would speak up when it's needed but before that I would listen and observe and kindly put my point.

5. Moderating on SE is much more than just wielding a mighty hammer, zapping spammers and wearing a cool hat. As a moderator, the community will be looking up to you, and ideally following your footsteps - you'll be some kind of a role model here. Are you planning to take a leadership role in the continuous building of this community, keeping it active, vibrant, appealing to reviewers / would-be reviewers / reviewees? If so, how? If not, why? Borrowed from Mathieu Guindon

My favorite question. Well I wish to learn and experience what it means to be a moderator of this community. And a part of that learning is leadership. A leader does not have to be an expert but should try to help solve the problem. For example, say in case a problem is not finding a proper answer than the what I would do is try to find a good resource who can who I have seen answer similar question before.

6. Moderators on Code Review automatically become moderators on the Stack Exchange chat system. The chat system includes Code Review and all Stack Exchange sites except Stack Overflow. A user on chat has posted a message that has been flagged as rude or abusive on a board related to the hypothetical, but obviously "controversial" or "polarizing" site flatearth.stackexchange.com. What actions do you take?

Well there is room for "controversial" answers but not for rudeness. This is community which I am a part of because I am here to learn and help each other. So kindness must be the general term of expression.

7. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Facilitate. Collaborate. Network. Learn. Help Improve The Community. Serve.

8. 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?

It would be nice to have the diamond. Take it as a part of achievement, a badge. Be glad.
If there might have been something I should have said before, if somebody now points it out, I would happily find some remedy if there was something wrong about it.

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

Well, I think to have a more rep would be great. It is also an achievement. But that is not a cup of my tea. I would rather be a facilitator and connect with other and try to solve the problem and learn from it.

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?

There are two separate issues here, the flags and the user. If the flags are valid, they will be acted upon. Even high-reputation users make mistakes. If the users have a track record of valuable answers, extra effort will be put into reducing the risks of the user giving up entirely or going down the slope even further. Moderators can invite users to private chatrooms, they seem ideal for this situation. Either way, if the Be Nice policy is repeatedly violated there have to be consequences. We can't have people scare away other users by their poor behaviour.

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

That's what we have The 1st Monitor for, the moderator-only chat. I'll communicate my concerns and trust their judgement if they have valid points. If necessary, a lively discussion behind closed doors won't hurt anybody.

3. You notice that a moderator on Code Review is not active very often, or when they are active, they do only the minimal amount of moderation, they do not participate often in codereview.meta.stackexchange.com and may not even have visited the meta site in some weeks. Is this a concern? What, if anything, should be done to get them to "pull their weight"?

This is a concern, but not as big as others might think. I'd attempt to contact the moderator, ask what's wrong. If the situation is temporary and the remaining moderators can handle the load, there is no problem. If the situation keeps on for months and the remaining moderators can't keep up, it's time to contact a Community Manager.

4. Moderators have a role that is much closer aligned to Stack Exchange as a corporation than the role of "just another high-rep user". This can mean enforcing policies that you'd like to see implemented differently, lobbying for change in those policies or any number of interactions that are not available to "your normal everyday user". What do you think of that prospect? If you could change one policy (be it SE-wide or CR), which would that be and why?

Yes, a moderator is a lot closer to the fire than most high-rep users are. That's part of the territory and I don't think someone should sign-up for the task if they're not able to deal with it. I'll deal with it the same way I'll deal with it on the workfloor: professionally. I'm here to do a job and in the end, the boss decides. That doesn't mean I won't voice my concerns.

The policies at Code Review are in pretty decent shape. If there's anything I could change (but no chance this is going to happen), it's the banner on closed questions. I think the older banners (which would list multiple close reasons if different types of close-votes were cast) which also listed who did the voting were more clear, more transparent and more sensible overall. Hiding this information is just poor UX.

5. Moderating on SE is much more than just wielding a mighty hammer, zapping spammers and wearing a cool hat. As a moderator, the community will be looking up to you, and ideally following your footsteps - you'll be some kind of a role model here. Are you planning to take a leadership role in the continuous building of this community, keeping it active, vibrant, appealing to reviewers / would-be reviewers / reviewees? If so, how? If not, why? Borrowed from Mathieu Guindon

I'd like to think I'm already doing this. Me and Peilonrayz are already very active on both the Code Review Meta and The 2nd Monitor (the site's main chatroom). Approachable by (new) users, helping others with what is and isn't on-topic, how to improve questions, getting people to vote, etc.

Will I continue doing so? Absolutely, regardless of whether I get elected.

6. Moderators on Code Review automatically become moderators on the Stack Exchange chat system. The chat system includes Code Review and all Stack Exchange sites except Stack Overflow. A user on chat has posted a message that has been flagged as rude or abusive on a board related to the hypothetical, but obviously "controversial" or "polarizing" site flatearth.stackexchange.com. What actions do you take?

This is a lot less hypothetical than it looks. Some of the Stack Exchange sites do indeed have a truly different culture. I won't go into details, but I've seen questions that would be removed for being offensive if anywhere but on that specific site.

I'd try to find a site-moderator first, they're the experts on their part of the network. If that fails and/or if the behaviour is extreme enough, I'd take action to diffuse the situation regardless. Carefully, because it's a bit of a minefield.

7. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

A lot of everything and preferably not too much.

And no, I don't say that because I'm afraid of the amount of work. Moderators are exception handlers. If there are no exceptions, the community should be able to moderate itself.

Moderators help with the extreme cases (rubbish, spam and offensive posts can be instantly deleted instead of requiring multiple users), guide users who're misusing the site or misunderstanding how it works (flags, queues, etc.), deal with moderator flags, taking the leadership role more publicly, keep an eye on meta (a must for moderators, in my opinion), support the Community Managers if they have questions/concerns about the site's health, it's a long list.

Although, knowing myself, if I see some questions that should very clearly be closed, I won't be able to help myself. Closing and leaving a comment myself is just the right thing to do, even if other users can do it too. I'll save the interesting ones for them.

8. 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?

Again, it comes with the territory. Staying politically correct on the network is something I've been practising the past couple of months either way, so I don't think it will change my style much.

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

For starters, I don't have 20k rep. And sometimes I miss those tools, because I'd like to be more useful than I already am. Moderators can help cut a long process short, do all those tasks I've listed earlier in the questionnaire and help a lot with the long-term viability of a site. They're an important part of keeping the site healthy, whether they like it or not. I think I can help with that.

I'm a janitor, not a fountain of infinite software wisdom.