A question is flagged: Please delete this question - my boss has seen it and says it contains confidential code - he's freaking out and wants me to remove it, but I can't delete it. The question was asked 3 days before, it has 2 answers, one is accepted. How do you respond?

Determining the confidentiality of the code is the first thing I would do, as it may be false concern, however unlikely.

Following that, the author of the post should be contacted and whether the confidential code can be edited out without making the post off-topic. If so, the post should be edited, and the revision history locked or deleted by CMs

Otherwise, the author should be referred to relevant parties at Stack Exchange.

What do you think about the new possibilities of migration coming with graduation? Graduation means we will get the ability to migrate questions away by community vote. It also means we may end up on the migration path of other sites. These user-migrations can be notoriously bad (see the old programmer's dilemma). I personally fear they will be. This means an additional moderation duty and quite possibly drama with other sites on the network... How would you address problems coming up with large-scale low-quality user migrations?

Creating drama, especially between sibling sites on the Stack Exchange Network, is certainly not what anyone wants. But, if a site (and this applies to CR migrating out also), is migrating consistently off-topic questions, then a friendly conversation (potentially supervised by a CM) between relevant site mods to better understand each other should occur. From there, mods can act on their new-found knowledge and help the citizens on the site better understand too.

As a moderator on Code Review you will also become a moderator on all of chat.stackexchange.com - which has rooms for most sites (all except Stack Overflow and Meta.StackExchange). A heated discussion is flagged in "The Suspension" chat room which is associated with BridgeBuilding.stackexchange.com - there is swearing and name calling. What do you do?

Although culture can vary per site and per room, swearing, name calling, and potential threats are not appropriate for any room on the Stack Exchange network.

I would join the room, and find out whether one of the site's mods is online. If so, only pitch in when necessary, provide potential support to this mod.

If there wasn't one of the site's mods online, I would remove all the offending comments and warn the users that it's unacceptable behaviour, and that if they didn't stop, they'd both get kickmuted from the chat room. From there, the chat room, and peace can be maintained until a CM or Site Mod comes online to take over from the work you've done.

A user has an issue with an action you, as moderator, took; calling you out on meta, a chat room, comments, or otherwise. How do you handle this?

Simply being a mod does not make you exempt from issue. So long as the user was willing to calmly discuss the issue with me, in a private chat room, I can better understand the user's point of view, and help resolve this issue.

If the user was being a troll, however, I would simply resolve it with the offending post removed, or closed.

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 invite the user to a private chat room, and discuss tactics on how they can work on improving their communications with other users. Otherwise, I'd suggest they ask fellow users in another chat room to help them construct their comments before they post them.

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

I would express to that mod my concerns, and how I feel they made a mistake, in a logical and calm format, as to achieve resolution.

"Moderators don't vote. They decide." Making binding decisions instead of voting will be a paradigm shift for nearly all of the nominees. How do you plan on making this adjustment?

So long as it's not blatantly off-topic, instead of being first to put the post through a review queue, I can wait and see the community's reaction and decisions towards the post, and make my own judgment call.

As one of the Revivalists, I have seen some users come through chat that are active and excited about Code Review, and they do well for months at a time, but then they drop off the face of the planet Code Review, sometimes they come back and some haven't come back yet. Are you in it for the long haul? Are you going to stick with us for the long haul? Are you ready to spend hours on Code Review, just for the love of the site? Are you Addicted to Code Review? How can you show us that you are serious about Code Review?

In the last little while, my rep on Code Review has spiked, and has been increasing very-very fast:

Code Review is going to 'graduate' soon, and with that (not only our new design!), will come a flurry of users, posts, answers, and the community will need to step up responsibility. As either a moderator, or an informed user, want to stay, to help lay the foundations for these new users, and to stay in the long run. I often unhealthily large amounts of time on Code Review, either surfing for zombies, lurking / posting in The 2nd Monitor, or writing code, and to me, writing code goes hand in hand with CR & 2nd Monitor. Code Review is a fantastic place, except some harsh words here and there, I can't really see why anyone would want to leave :-)

Can I prove it?, well, I have a 3D printer at my disposal, I could 3D print the current site designed logo. Jokes aside, this community is wonderful, and I want to stay a part of it.

Code Review has approximately at 15-to-1 upvote-to-downvote ratio, nearly double Stack Overflow's approximate 8-to-1 ratio. As a moderator, you'll be regularly viewing the worst of the worst posts made to Code Review. Do you consider up and down voting of a moderation tool at all? Do you think you downvote enough questions? Do you think you upvote enough questions?

Personally, no, I don't downvote enough questions, but usually, the off-topic questions are handled by the community without the need for downvoting, and oftentimes, I should be using them. Personally, I have close to a 10-to-1 ratio, I'm hoping for at least 8 or 7 to-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?

Being a moderator holds weight, more weight than an average user commenting on a scenario. I think that although parts of the moderation tools available to mods are available to 10k or 20k < users, the tools available as moderator will be help me be more effective in furthering the community.