Report history is the most important consideration for a moderator candidate. Over the forum's many years, relatively "newbie" members with good report histories have consistently done much better as mods than veteran, well-respected members with poor report histories. That said, not all reports are equal, so a simple report count doesn't tell the whole story. Also, in addition to report histories, it's necessary to consider factors such as the ability of the candidate to be neutral, their trustworthiness, etc. It's also nice to choose a moderator who people generally already trust/respect, but sometimes this is outweighed by other factors.

If a poll is created, I will not completely ignore the results, but I will also not use it as a primary influence. I'm more interested in arguments people have for or against certain candidates.