9

Not sure if this should be an answer in the linked question or not. Anyway, I think a question is better than an answer in this case.

In Do we need more moderators?,

[...] Let's say that the answer to the title question is "yes" if this post reaches at least 30 upvotes in one month's time.

Now the question is exactly one month old, and it has got 37 upvotes (and 10 downvotes). Therefore the answer is: Yes, we need more moderators.

But...

  • As far as I can see, rudeness is reducing. The number of related posts is reducing. The domino effect (is it a domino effect?) is stopping, or has stopped.
  • Behaviours are only annoying if you get annoyed by them. — David Carlisle

  • In my humble opinion, we don't really need anymore moderators. Our three moderators are moderating the site very well. I can see that by my recent "moderator intervention" flags.
  • I think CarLaTeX's intention is 30 score, not 30 upvotes.

In short: I think my answer is No. We don't need more moderators. What do you think?

8

You guessed my intentions well, I intended score not only upvotes. Otherwise, I could have had 30 upvotes and 40 downvotes and the proposal would have passed.

I also agree with marmot, elections would be a sign of democracy, but there was a scarce enthusiasm about them. Hence, I think the Community doesn't consider them necessary.

Moreover, I also think the situation is a little better than at the beginning of April:

  • I saw just-do-it-for-me questions by old users downvoted or, at least, not massively upvoted as before
  • the TeXnical topics are prevailing in chat
  • last but not least, the trolls either left the site or calm down (it is likely the mods had a role in it).

Hence, the answer to my question is "no".

You must log in to answer this question.