Here's my set of answers. Just to be clear, I have not read answers by other nominees and the followup yet.
Sometimes the situation may arise where someone will raise a flag
relating to one of your posts. This may be a flag directly on one of
your questions, answers or comments, or it may be a flag on a answer
or comment to your previous post. Would you treat this any differently
than any other flag? Why or why not? And if so, how?
I would treat this differently. There are good reasons to have more than one active moderators here, and in my opinion this is one of them. If possible, I'd let one of the other moderators handle this since there may be a conflict of interests here. Of course, that doesn't mean I won't take notice. I'm not perfect, I don't know everything and for sure I have made and will make mistakes. So I'd take a good look at the flag and try to figure out what the reason was and possibly discuss this with another moderator.
Looking back at things I've done and written and learn from them is something I've always done in my professional carreer and what I'll do if I should become a moderator as well.
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 have a gut feeling what triggered this question :)
This is a tough one, and unfortunately there's no simple, one-size-fits-all solution for this. The trick is to make this person see what problems some of these comments and answers have and what he should do to improve them. This may be harder than it sounds since there can always be differences of opinion on the quality of answers and this person may be unwilling to change. Being able to understand and explain the rules of this stack exchange should be one of the important tasks here.
Since this person obviously has some value to this stack exchange, it would be my goal to try to keep him motivated to stay active in a good way, so I'd try to talk with him while handling the flags.
I know that banning people may be an option, but in my opinion this is something not to be done lightly, especially for people who are posting useful things as well. Should talking, closing posts, flagging and downvoting them not work, I'd talk with the other mods about a way to solve this.
How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc
a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
Well, the obvious anwers for me is to discuss this with him. Just like I may have good reasons to do one thing, another moderator may have good reasons to do otherwise. By talking to them I may be able to understand this or to convince the other moderator of my point of view.
As a result of this discussion, it can be useful to propose changes on wording of for example what's on topic, to make sure it's unabiguous and these differences of opinion won't have happen again.
But of course it can also be the case that we can't agree. In that case I'd ask the third moderator for his guidance.
I don't really hold grudges and am willing to listen to other people and accept their opinions, so this is not something I think should become a problem.
In your opinion, what do moderators do?
Hah. I think that's something many people on this site don't really know, me included. Since I considered running for moderator I learned some things about this, but only the current moderators can answer this one correctly. So I'll just answer with what I think they should do. The role moderators on this SE have is the one of facilitators. If this SE runs properly, moderators mostly operate in the background, making this stack exchange a valuable place for everyone.
Obviously, one of the most prominent things moderators do is to implement the guidelines which have been determined by this community on what's on topic and off topic. This is a very important and sometimes quite tricky task, since there are quite a few gray areas between this stack exchange and for example Superuser, Serverfault, Electronics and Security. The importance primarily lies in keeping this stack exchange interesting enough for professional network engineers, without being too unwelcoming to new people. One of the roles of the moderators is to guard this balance, so that both people with questions and people able to answer them use this site.
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 aware of that. However, from the start I've chosen to use my own name for this account. So I'm already aware of the fact that everything I post may be linked to me and that this could be used in my professional life, both in a good way and in a bad way.
I understand that the diamond behind my name may have some effects to others. Like a lot of things, this can be used for both good and bad: it can be used to lead by example, but I also understand that anything 'inappropriate' I write and have written may reflect badly on this stack exchange as a whole.
As for what this may do to my reputation (in a positive or negative way), I don't care much about this: I like being active on this SE and helping out.
Lastly, I know that some people may see me differently when I'm marked as being given moderator rights. I think that it's not a bad thing, it can be useful for being approachable for people who have questions about things happening here. However, people may also look up to me because of the 'extra powers'. This is something I don't really like, as far as I'm concerned moderators are just like other people who enjoy helping this stack exchange to run smoothly.
In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more
effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
Being a moderator and being someone who's good at answering many of the questions on this SE are two different things. They may go hand in hand, but they don't have to. Someone can be very good at reviewing questions, answers and flags and it would be a shame to have him have to reach at least 10k reputation, because at this time there aren't that many people who have the knowledge to reach that here given the number of questions asked, how specific these answers are and the number of upvotes on questions and answers.
I think it's a shame to miss out on people who are willing to put time and effort in moderation and who are good at this because of their lack of reputation, and I think this applies to me as well.
Just a few closing remarks: I chose to run as a nominee because this stack exchange deserves enthousiastic, good, active moderators and I because I think people here should have a choice in who is granted the 'powers' of moderation. One thing I've come to realise in the last couple of days is that moderation is something which often happens in the background and which invisible to most 'normal' people. I don't think I know everything there is to know about being moderator, but I'm willing to learn and put the time and effort in it.