Return to Answer

I was very aware of the situation as it played out. I suppose it's still playing out really. My top voted meta post on the StackExchange network is related to the fallout from those events. I've always despised blind pandering and consider such things off-topic for a site that primarily provides technical/professional/advisory information. I will not be a mouth-piece for the company. Heck, even for the company that pays me money to do stuff for them, I've made it crystal clear to Human Resources that I do not approve of pandering and will not be a part of it. If that's a problem for them, it will just work itself out the way it needs to (I mean that for both companies). My skills and interactions with my fellow professionals are not dependent on my race/gender/orientation/ethnicity/immigration-background/religion/etc... nor is any of that dependent on theirs. That will not change if I become a moderator and it will not be forced on me.

1. My role when an unpopular feature is rolled out is, in my opinion, unchanged. I will speak out against it just the same as I've done in the past. As I pointed out in the comment of my Moderator Questions post, no part of the Moderator's Agreement or the linked Terms of Service state that any of us, moderators or otherwise, have to support SE actions.
2. The same as I've done in the past. Take a peak at my meta/Meta posts. At one point, I advised them that they should tell their lawyers to take a hike.

I was very aware of the situation as it played out. I suppose it's still playing out really. My top voted meta post on the StackExchange network is related to the fallout from those events. I've always despised blind pandering and consider such things off-topic for a site that primarily provides technical/professional/advisory information. I will not be a mouth-piece for the company. Heck, even for the company that pays me money to do stuff for them, I've made it crystal clear to Human Resources that I do not approve of pandering and will not be a part of it. If that's a problem for them, it will just work itself out the way it needs to (I mean that for both companies). My skills and interactions with my fellow professionals are not dependent on my race/gender/orientation/ethnicity/immigration-background/religion/etc... nor is any of that dependent on theirs. That will not change if I become a moderator and it will not be forced on me.

1. My role when an unpopular feature is rolled out is, in my opinion, unchanged. I will speak out against it just the same as I've done in the past. As I pointed out in the comment of my Moderator Questions post, no part of the Moderator's Agreement or the linked Terms of Service state that any of us, moderators or otherwise, have to support SE actions.
2. The same as I've done in the past. Take a peak at my meta/Meta posts. At one point, I advised them that they should tell their lawyers to take a hike.

Possibly take part in arguing-with/flagging them myself from time to time. In fact, I may already have. It's been my experience that users like this eventually burn out and fade away. Just keep taps on things and see if anything ban-worthy comes up.

Possibly take part in arguing-with/flagging them myself from time to time. In fact, I may already have. It's been my experience that users like this eventually burn out and fade away. Just keep tabs on things and see if anything ban-worthy comes up.