I will be leaving for overseas in one week from now.....so I don't actually have time for any of this. But some issues to consider:
1. Tati does not visit here whilst Sysiyo I believe has left for an undetermined period. There are arguably two positions available for additional moderators given the current system of four in total.
2. When I became administrator, Evan instructed me that I was to nominate the moderators myself rather than do so through public means. In private, I seeked the advice of three long term TWers and I am open to seeking the input of at least a small group of established users. I am not sure if I would go entirely against Evan's advice and elect moderators entirely through public vote.
3. If moderators are elected democratically/publically, how can we assure that users are not rigging the voting system - as what happened in twister's popularity contests?
4. If moderators are elected democratically/publically, then by rights we should also have terms in office.....like a period of one year, etc.
5. Who will be responsible for accurately moderating the elections? Could I come back in a month's time knowing that everything has been sorted and decided fairly? Possibly, we would need some 'election moderators' and a temporary forum set up for them to formulate the best means of running the elections.
6. In my experience, TW is an evolving beast in terms of posting styles, moderating styles, etc. The only people that would have a chance of understanding TW or the 'point' of certain posters might be long term users. Should we place the responsibility of electing new moderators in the hands of newbies for instance?
7. With points 3 and 6 in mind.....how would you feel about the moderators being elected ONLY by users that have been registered since say, 2000 or 2001?