Kryontian is one of the best posters on GAF, he'd be a good mod. To be fair I thought Mumei was a great mod, and still do
Objectively, I think being a hardcore advocate of any side of a particular topic (especially a controversial one) should disqualify you as a candidate for modship. Such a partisan view (and moreover, being
vocally partisan) would really mar things when it came to the mood and atmosphere in discussion threads. The reminder of "only one viewpoint can exist" would perpetually hang over the thread once a particular mod entered it. And that inhibits healthy discussion. But really, when the unwritten rules come into play, I think that some things just aren't meant to be discussed and that's totally fine with me.. I've been banned enough times to get that.
I mean, krypt0nian and I have engaged in tense discussions in the past and I've tried to patch things up with him long ago (just to show that I don't hold grudges against--or dislike--anyone just because we may have different opinions). But he's FAR from the worst; I can think of 2 other people who would force me to stop posting altogether if they ever became mod. But krypt0nian is my American Idol buddy so it wouldn't be so things wouldn't be so bad.
Why don't the mods leave it up to the members to decide from a pool of candidates (or at the very LEAST gather input)? Sometimes GAF feels like a dictatorship because the members never get any say about something important. It doesn't have to be a straight-up democracy but some sense of actual contribution would be nice.
