I've seen/participated in a couple of moderator elections, and indeed have been a candidate in one as well. And I've seen the weak give way to the strong. The new give way to the veterans.
But I've also seen the low-rep pushed out of the way for the high-rep, and I don't like this.
These points are all but arbitrary, a grouping of random people's first impressions of you.
So when the mod election rolls around, what are the standards we should judge by?
- Reputation Score, which mostly shows how active you or other people are?
- Time on the site, which indicates when you first found out this page was here?
- Number of badges, which already borders on arbitrary as it is?
- Questions answered, which could mean just about anything?
Or can we use numerical values to judge a person for their ability at all?
I know, this is pretty early to worry about this, but I believe that we should come up with a good way to identify what we want out of not only a mod, but also a regular user, and how we use that way to decide things.