12

In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected from an earlier thread have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. With the given submission count, all questions were taken along with all backup questions for a total of 8 questions.

As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes. Please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.

Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.

Good luck to all of the candidates!

Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.

To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):


  1. A question from the site has got into the Hot Network Questions, and has attracted several joke answers which have attracted quite a few votes. The answers technically solve the problem, but are clearly not serious and probably won't be very useful. What would you do in this situation?

  2. 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?

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

  4. The scope of the site is generally the result of a consensus. As a moderator, you are expected to participate and to lead that continuous definition. How do you feel about enforcing definitions on which you do not necesarily agree?

  5. Do badges/reputation matter in retaining the interest of SE Users? If you think not, what other things might help to do so? If you think they do, then hypothetically if you could change it, what is the thing that is not currently recognised/awarded but ought most to be?

  6. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

  7. 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?

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

  • Conversation regarding site scope moved to chat. – goldilocks Jan 23 '17 at 20:49
  • @techraf There are added privileges at 10K and 20K that have to do with janitorial/admin type tasks. – goldilocks Jan 25 '17 at 20:35
  • 2
    I vote for this question to be closed because it is primarily opinion-based. :D – tlhIngan Jan 27 '17 at 18:24
  • @techraf Sure. I didn't make up the question, but it seems like a spin on "Why do you want to do this?", which is reasonable enough. If you have a hard time explaining that, it's not a good sign... – goldilocks Jan 27 '17 at 20:38
7

Jacobm001

Since I put up a nomination method, I wanted to start answering questions. I don't have time to finish them all at the moment, so I will answer them as I have time throughout the day.


Question 1

A question from the site has got into the Hot Network Questions, and has attracted several joke answers which have attracted quite a few votes. The answers technically solve the problem, but are clearly not serious and probably won't be very useful. What would you do in this situation?

The first thing I would do is mark the question as being "protected". While this certainly won't prevent all the incoming junk, it's the most logical place to start. After that I would post a reminder under the question (pinned if possible) that joke answers are off topic.

If the answer is clearly unhelpful, I'm still hesitant to outright delete non-abusive and non-spam content. Instead, I would convert the answer to a comment, and send the user a private message explaining what was done and why.


Question 2

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?

My answer would depend greatly on what the flags are, and how many users they're coming from.

If flags are primarily provided by one or two users, it implies that there might be some bad blood between those users. In this case I'd try speaking with the user(s) who are consistently flagging the other the user and see if I can't mediate the conflict into something more reasonable.

If the problem is more widespread, I would contact the individual being flagged and speak with them about the problem. Sometimes people don't realize that they have a habit of coming off as curt or that their behavior is offensive to others. If they're receptive, the problem is likely solved here.

If neither of these solutions work, I would then take steps to suspend the user if necessary.


Question 3

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

Moderation of this site should be a team effort. If I disagree with another moderator's decision, I will bring it up in the moderators' chat room to see if we can come to a solution we all agree on. If it comes down a one off differing opinion, I would rather leave the original decision (either mine or theirs) as is, rather than create community division.

Luckily we have more than two moderators, so there's good opportunity for back and forth when dealing with various issues.


Question 4

The scope of the site is generally the result of a consensus. As a moderator, you are expected to participate and to lead that continuous definition. How do you feel about enforcing definitions on which you do not necesarily [sic] agree?

As a moderator, I will do my best to guide the role of the site as best I can. I realize that I may not always agree with the rules as is, but I am willing to enforce the scope as the community defines it.

In my opinion, if a moderator cannot enforce the definition as is stated by their community, then that moderator should be willing to step down. StackExchange moderators do not own the site they govern.


Question 5

Do badges/reputation matter in retaining the interest of SE Users? If you think not, what other things might help to do so? If you think they do, then hypothetically if you could change it, what is the thing that is not currently recognised/awarded but ought most to be?

I think badges play a huge part in what keeps people interested in SE. Sure it's not the only thing, but gamification is a big deal. I've personally found myself going beyond what I would normally participate in because I wanted to get a badge for it.

I would like to see more badges for assisting the site as a whole. We don't always need additional answers, but edits to help flesh out answers, comments, and reviewing could all use be expanded.


Question 6

In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Above all else, a moderator helps keep the site alive and to keep it progressing.


Question 7

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'm okay with being in the spotlight. I realize that my actions will be held to a higher standard, and I will do my best to live up to that standard.


Question 8

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

Moderators are given extra tools to do their job, and there is a certain amount of clout that comes with the diamond. I would like to not only help with the site issues, but be involved in the processes in which community concerns are dealt with by StackExchange.

While I could do a lot with 10k or 20k rep, reputation gains are relatively slow, and I'd like to start helping more now.

6

pandalion98


1.

  1. A question from the site has got into the Hot Network Questions, and has attracted several joke answers which have attracted quite a few votes. The answers technically solve the problem, but are clearly not serious and probably won't be very useful. What would you do in this situation?

I think the best move in this situation, other than telling everyone "please stop", is to mark it as "protected" as soon as possible (something I see done quite liberally over at Physics SE). After that, assess the situation, cull spam, and monitor.

If necessary, I would also ask the users involved to edit their answers.

I would also ask other moderators for advice if necessary.


2.

  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?

As I've mentioned, I would assess first why it's happening in the first place. If the user is salty in general, or If it's conflict between users, a heart-to-heart discussion with the user(s) may alleviate the situation.

If it seems that they're continuing the trend on purpose, restrictions on the user(s) may be necessary.


3.

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

Quite simply, I'd ask why. If I'm not satisfied with the explanation, I'd arrange for a small discussion together with others or with only the two of us (openly, in the relevant chat room), depending on the situation.


4.

  1. The scope of the site is generally the result of a consensus. As a moderator, you are expected to participate and to lead that continuous definition. How do you feel about enforcing definitions on which you do not necesarily agree?

I'm quite loose about my opinions, and you usually won't hear me argue with another regarding the matter.

But, if the matter at hand is clearly bs, I would try to get my opinion out to the other moderators.

If all of them unanimously disagree, I would be cool with it and do my duty, else I would give up my position as a moderator (with notice to prevent a vacuum). There is no point in starting a conflict.


5.

  1. Do badges/reputation matter in retaining the interest of SE Users? If you think not, what other things might help to do so? If you think they do, then hypothetically if you could change it, what is the thing that is not currently recognised/awarded but ought most to be?

Of course they do, more or less.

Let's be real here for a second. Based on my observation, a part, but not all, do try to get on top of the game. Some are in it for the reputation points, others are about badges, some are both, but what really catches my eye is that a significant part of SE users don't care about those at all.

Users, based on my observation, are more keen about getting their questions answered.

All in all, content quality looks like the primary factor that makes users stay. That's where the moderators, and concerned citizens, come into play.

"Content creators" (those who answer more than ask), on the other hand, seem to be the ones most concerned about badges/reputation. In the current state, I wouldn't really change anything since the "game" is already pretty balanced. It's already giving out rewards to relevant actions.


6.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

The least amount of work possible.

That means managing the community in such a way that causes the least disruption, or dissipates disruption quickly.

This also means keeping the site alive and developing since a healthy community tends to self-regulate, minimizing load on the moderators.


7.

  1. 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?

Meh.

I have not done and do not plan on doing scandalous actions, and I plan to continue creating and curating high-quality content, hence I'm very much okay with a diamond attachment.

There's nothing to be ashamed of if most/all of one's work has quality.

In fact, it feels pretty awesome.


8.

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

Moderators have additional tools and privileges that makes certain processes quicker.

Moderators are also viewed by most as a peacekeeper. If I spot something out of order, being a moderator would let me be not "just another voice in the crowd". It would enable me to be more direct.

Last, but not least,

Moderators act as a liaison between the community and Stack Exchange the company.

Site moderators can also escalate issues of moderation by contacting the Stack Exchange team for guidance and administrative or technical tasks.

Additionally, moderators can help draw extra attention to bugs, feature requests, or other issues that affect their site if the community is unable to resolve the issue on their meta site.

I think that explains it quite well.

6
  1. A question from the site has got into the Hot Network Questions, and has attracted several joke answers which have attracted quite a few votes. The answers technically solve the problem, but are clearly not serious and probably won't be very useful. What would you do in this situation?

I quite enjoy some of the more legendary StackOverflow threads, but they do have a tendency towards closure. I think they're not necessarily harmful for the site provided as long as everyone plays nice.

My goal here would be to make sure that whoever asked the question has the opportunity to see it answered. Given that several answers are already available I would inform the user that the question stands a reasonable chance of closure, giving them the chance to choose the best of a fairly bad bunch. The question should be marked as protected at the same time, restricting further answers to people who have at least a passing familiarity with the site. Following that, outright garbage answers should be deleted or converted to comments, and anything which is a reasonable attempt at an answer stays where it is.

  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?

StackExchange has several incredibly valuable users who are well known for their unique conversational style, and I've noticed a few names creeping up the ranks on the Pi board who are a little terser than others. I'm a great believer in the site's 'be nice' guidelines. If someone is consistently and needlessly aggressive, rude, or otherwise unpleasant to their fellow users then there's a real risk of long term damage to the board's user base, particularly here where we have so many young and/or inexperienced users. I would begin by contacting the individual privately for a reasonable chat about their lack of civility. If we fail to reach an amicable understanding, or the behaviour continues, then I'd consult with my fellow moderators to make sure we're all in agreement before taking steps to restrict or suspend the user.

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

With the decline in traditional farming practices rendering it impractical to source decent mobs with pitchforks these days, I think I'd have to settle for a good chat and possibly a round of rock/paper/scissors. The problems we solve here are generally quite small problems in the grand scheme of things, and aren't worth the potential fallout of a mod war. I'd present my case as best I can, take a consensus among the group, then move swiftly onwards.

  1. The scope of the site is generally the result of a consensus. As a moderator, you are expected to participate and to lead that continuous definition. How do you feel about enforcing definitions on which you do not necesarily agree?

Extremely relaxed. If I were selected as a moderator I'd be working in a group of 3 presumably reasonable people with a decent understanding of the board and its general direction. If that group, hopefully after some community engagement on Meta, decides that things are not going to go my way on this occasion then I have to presume that they know what they're about and go with the flow.

  1. Do badges/reputation matter in retaining the interest of SE Users? If you think not, what other things might help to do so? If you think they do, then hypothetically if you could change it, what is the thing that is not currently recognised/awarded but ought most to be?

Yes. I don't think there's any way you could argue that the people who come back often aren't, at some point in their SE careers, motivated at least a little bit by the points. I, personally, love my wee heap of imaginary internet points, and still occasionally have a daft hour or two chasing an elusive badge.

As to what I'd change, I'd like to reward at least early-stage up voting. On any given day you can scroll all the way down the front page and see half a dozen serviceable questions with no up votes. It might be nice to incorporate a new badge for your 100th up vote, or something a little more complex like a badge for your 10th up vote on a first answer that was selected as the correct answer. Something which encourages passing users to engage a little more with material outwith their own Q&As.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Ideally nothing. Moderators are the board's nuclear option, and should make use of the mod tools as little as possible. They should encourage the community to keep doing the things it does well, provide a good example to other users and do what they can to keep the peace. If absolutely necessary, mods should be confident enough in their understanding of SE and this board that they can make effective interventions - suspending users, escalating issues to SE staff, etc.

  1. 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?

Well I was fine until I read this question. Now my inner hamster wheels are spinning furiously trying to figure out which over-tired 2am answer I'm going to get called out on first. If I were selected as a moderator I hope I'd continue to contribute to the site as best I can, ignoring the addition of the diamond in all but exceptional circumstances. If you need to invoke your status as a mod to win an argument you've already lost it.

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

Mods carry a little more responsibility for the nuts-and-bolts operation of the site than your average high-scoring user, and perhaps a little more input into its capabilities. Further to that, they can deal directly with the (thankfully rare) incidents of spam and unwanted user behaviour, and can serve more effectively as mediators during bunfights.

4
  1. A question from the site has got into the Hot Network Questions, and has attracted several joke answers which have attracted quite a few votes. The answers technically solve the problem, but are clearly not serious and probably won't be very useful. What would you do in this situation?

Well, there's 2 things that come to mind in a situation like this: while I do enjoy some levity in providing useful and technical information, I do despise trolling. If the answers do solve the problem, jokes are fine. The vote system is designed for the best answers to flat to the top, so if the community is voting for these, then this answer is "good" in the community's opinion. I'm a little fuzzy on how an answer can solve the problem but not be very useful, but I do believe I've come across a few of those: I'd have to evaluate the specific answer and decide if it's an "appropriate answer" or not.

  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?

This is a community, there will be dissension to varying degrees about technical stuff. If the user's answers are valuable, then they are valuable, end of story. Other users are free to disagree or object or suggest their own answers, as long as everybody remains civil and respectful, this is how you foster discussion and the sense of community. I love seeing people commenting on other people's answers in order to contrast or interject. It's gotten me to refine my answers on a couple of occasions.

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

This situation arose on another StackExchange site I'm active on, very recently. A Mod opened a question on the Meta site to discuss this, and then we talked about it some more in the chat. Initial impressions are often misleading: when I saw the questions up for closing, I initially thought the Mod was being way too harsh (the question seemed innocuous to me), but reading the Meta thread, the Mod posted links to a slew of similar questions from the same user, and after digging some more on my own, I decided for myself that this user was trolling the site. I jumped in the chat and shared my findings with the Mod and others and fully supported the Mod in his attempt to close the questions.

  1. The scope of the site is generally the result of a consensus. As a moderator, you are expected to participate and to lead that continuous definition. How do you feel about enforcing definitions on which you do not necesarily agree?

Well, 2 things: if I don't agree with a definition, I can lobby to community to change it, but in the meantime, what we have is what we have.

  1. Do badges/reputation matter in retaining the interest of SE Users? If you think not, what other things might help to do so? If you think they do, then hypothetically if you could change it, what is the thing that is not currently recognised/awarded but ought most to be?

Well, 2 things: badges and reputation are a way to direct users' activity towards things that are meaningful and helpful to the site, on the other hand, it's easy to fall into the trap of blindly pursuing badges and reputation for their own sake at the expense of the site. For example, once a user reaches a level that unlocks edits everywhere, some users aggressively pursue the editing badges. While there's nothing inherently wrong with editing 100 posts (as long as the edits are legit), it does show those posts as "active." This can be detrimental to the site when people are gong for the "archeologist" badges, and all of a sudden dozens of ancient posts float up to the surface as "active." What I wold change, well, there's a few of these badges that are problematic to me (like the archeologist and the electorate), I would lobby to have them deleted.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

In my experience, Moderators are just experienced users that have access to site maintaining tools. They still eat pizza while one-hand-typing an answer, they just get called upon as a mediator whenever there's either a difference of opinion about something or there's something "not normal" and the site needs guidance on how to proceed.

  1. 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?

A diamond? Can I get 2? :D Moderator or not, I stand by my previous posts. Questions or answers or comments, I only post things that (in my opinion) help and are appropriate.

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

Rep reflects amount of activity, which keeps the site alive. Moderator tasks keep the site and the community running smoothly, which is't the same thing at all. A successful site needs both.

0

Darth Vader

Question 1

  1. A question from the site has got into the Hot Network Questions, and has attracted several joke answers which have attracted quite a few votes. The answers technically solve the problem, but are clearly not serious and probably won't be very useful. What would you do in this situation?

Firstly I have noticed that questions from this site rarely feature on the Hot Network Questions. So clearly someone has asked a really question and it should be treated as such. Alternatively the question has been asked as a bit of joke, hence it has attracted a lot of attention.

If its the first scenario, and users new to the site are posting the potentially inappropriate answers I would comment on the answers for the user to take the Tour and find out how the site should work. For answers that clearly do not answer the question I would give the user a warning and delete/edit the answer as appropriate. If its more experienced users posting answers, I would urge them to give a genuine answer to the question and to leave any joke solutions at the bottom of their answer and label it as such.

Another action that should be taken if the question is generating lots of unhelpful answers from new users is to mark the question as protected.

In the second scenario where the question was asked as a joke, or asked with the intention of generating joke answers. Firstly I would create a chat with the user to discuss what prompted them to ask the question and to remind them of how to act on the site. I would potentially then proceed to close the question as off-topic.

In both scenarios I would also discuss with my fellow moderators what other action should be taken with regards to the question and the answers it generated.

Question 2

  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?

I would start by looking through what caused the flags to be raised in the first place. The chances are its a user who has lots of knowledge related to the Pi and are not responding well to any criticisms on their answers. Or are getting frustrated by other users writing comments on the answer asking for more clarity or information.

The solution I would take is to open a private chat with the user and firstly thank them for their contribution to the site. Its not something I think we do enough of. I would then remind them politely to stop and think before writing comments and to try and put themselves in the other person's shoes.

I would then wait to see if their behavior improves if not I would look at suspending their account for a short period of time. Failing that, as a last resort I would remove the user.

Alternatively if the flags have stemmed from a small group of users or a single user I would talk to them to find out what lead to them raising a number of flags against a single user. If necessary they would be banned from flagging, if that does not resolve the issue then I would take further disciplinary action. However, all of this I would discuss with my fellow moderators, so we could formulate a plan to minimize this behavior occurring again in the future.

Question 3

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

In such a case I would raise the issue with them and get them to lay out their reasoning for any action they took. I would also politely explain my point of view. If they then don't budge on the issue I would discuss the matter with another moderator. Ultimately if both moderators do not agree with my opinion, I would let it go. There is no point starting a massive argument over a single question.

Question 4

  1. The scope of the site is generally the result of a consensus. As a moderator, you are expected to participate and to lead that continuous definition. How do you feel about enforcing definitions on which you do not necesarily agree?

Out of a whole set of definitions there is always going to be things you do not agree about. Contrastingly, within those definitions there will always be things you do agree on. So, to that end you are still enforcing definitions you agree with, and of course I would enforce stuff I might not agree with. Although, those things if I feel the need, can be discussed with my fellow moderators to find out why those definitions exist. Opposed to blindly enforcing definitions that I do not agree with, due to possibly misunderstanding or misinterpreting them.

Question 5

  1. Do badges/reputation matter in retaining the interest of SE Users? If you think not, what other things might help to do so? If you think they do, then hypothetically if you could change it, what is the thing that is not currently recognised/awarded but ought most to be?

Speaking as an SE user I get a real feel of satisfaction when I earn a new badge or open up the site to discover I have earned some reputation. Badges and reputation give users something to work towards, and with earning reputation it earns you new privileges. As the current system of badges and reputation goes I think it works quite well.

Nevertheless, that does not make it perfect. I personally would like to see an introduction of platinum badges which would sit above gold badges. These would be awarded for outstanding achievements. Also certain badges can be earned multiple times. I think it would be interesting, for example, once a bronze badge is earned say 10 times you receive a silver or even a gold badge.

Question 6

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderators are here to keep the site functioning and to prevent the whole place from descending into chaos. Their job is to help guide new users in the right direction and to gently remind experienced users what to do if they go off-track. They also edit questions and answers as appropriate and handle posts which do not belong on the site. They are also a point of wisdom when users are unsure of something relating to the site.

Question 7

  1. 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 will be the first to admit my history isn't perfect, however I have improved greatly since I have joined the site and I always endeavor to my best. However that diamond represents a position of responsibility, of someone who leads the way. And that is always what I try to do.

Question 8

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

Getting to 10K or 20K reputation takes a long time, and users of this site can be a bit stingy with upvotes. I of course will continue to do my best to increase my reputation. However, I have reached a point where there is a limit to what tasks I can carry out with the reputation I have. So, by becoming a moderator I will have all the other tools required to continue doing my best to help the site.

-3

Sir_ian

  1. A question from the site has got into the Hot Network Questions, and has attracted several joke answers which have attracted quite a few votes. The answers technically solve the problem, but are clearly not serious and probably won't be very useful. What would you do in this situation?

If the problem is lack of details or sources simply request more, if they really solve the problem i see no reason why they shouldn't stay as anwsers but with better formatting/details/sources/explanation etc.

  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?

Give them a warning in chat or some more private method to please stop and be nice.

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

Talk to them in the mod chat room (that does exist right?) and explain why i think it shouldn't closed/deleted/etc

  1. The scope of the site is generally the result of a consensus. As a moderator, you are expected to participate and to lead that continuous definition. How do you feel about enforcing definitions on which you do not necessarily agree?

Living in a democratic republic and a big family i have learned to abide by the consensus formed by others and would be willing to enforce things that I disagree with.

  1. Do badges/reputation matter in retaining the interest of SE Users? If you think not, what other things might help to do so? If you think they do, then hypothetically if you could change it, what is the thing that is not currently recognized/awarded but ought most to be?

Yes, nothing, nothing.

  1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?

Moderators are there to keep the site focused and good quality and serve as examples of and to good users.

  1. 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 feel like that is one of the points of being a moderator. Serving as an example to others of what good users look like.

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

It would take quite a bit longer and certainly lakes some of the respect of being a diamond.

  • Some comments from those voting -1 would be ... insightful. – MadMike Mar 15 '17 at 8:40

You must log in to answer this question.

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