"Third time's the charm," k5 says as he posts yet another staff application.

[Girdo]

Yup. Though Leon's been a host for quite a while.

[kevinz000]

Leon's been co-host for as long as I remember and I'm relatively new.

"The questions don't mention any of that Kev.
Q1 consists of forced but otherwise passable escalation initiated by P2 onto P1 - could be a metagrudge but not specified.
Q2 is low-level greytidery, not selfantagging - could be a newb or a griefer, but until something important happens it doesn't matter to me.
Q3 is almost definitely metabuddying but I'm giving them benefit of the doubt since the question doesn't specify it. It could be a newb that knows robotics but not CoC.

Remember: metabuddying is not the same as metacomms. Two characters becoming close friends ingame (and trusting each other with things they wouldn't trust others) does not necessarily mean that they're coordinating their movements out of game. Metagrudging, meanwhile, is fine as long as it escalates right. Going up to someone and toolboxing them with no warning is bad. Accusing them of being a scumbag, getting accused back of being an asshole, then slowly working up to toolboxes is a-ok."

Yes, I know the difference between metabuddies and metacomms. Metacomms is zero tolerance. Metabuddying and metagrudging are far, far more grey area considering how difficult it is to correctly decipher a situation involving it. While this is a social game and you shouldn't have all the admin protection possible if you manage to piss off the entire server consistently every round, this game is not about who has the most or most robust metabuddies. This game is also not about going out of your way to dick with other players. Metabuddying and metagrudging to a degree will always happen as we are human, we have emotions and we have feelings towards others, this is just how we work and it's expected otherwise said human would have no friends and enemies alike. However, when it becomes disruptive to the other's rounds, other people's rounds, or the server, is when it becomes problematic. People should not get repeated or large IC benefits for being friends with the right people.

Often times as an admin you will have to develop your own understanding, profile, and observations of players, regardless of whether they're a chronic bwoink magnet or a model player. Yes, we are allowed to have opinions. You don't get to give preferential or bad treatment to anyone basde on your opinion of them during an ahelp, but that being said we will always have our nice and naughty lists. A good and informed admin will often have deeper understanding of the dynamics between players, atleast the more common ones, and the ones between frequent players to the server. I'm not saying you should be required to sit infront of the screen for 8 hours a day watching people play, but having mental notes helps when things like aforementioned metabuddying and metagrudging comes into play. You will, with experience, be able to read players for their intentions. Ofcourse, this is an intuition thing and highly subjective, and you can always be wrong, but it's important if you want to have mutual understanding with the players you help govern.

And as a further note, for almost all of the questions, this stuff applies. We do not need an ahelp to act, although it's the usual case. If you see extremely suspicious or rule breaking behavior, you can always investigate yourself, not even needing to bwoink sometimes, as I've left secret notes on people to note down behavior without an actual "Hey what are you doing" before. See: Number 3, very possible metabuddying/powergaming/whatever, number 2, greytiding and powergaming/stealing items for no reason, number 1, possibly the aggressor is a chronic one?

Frequent lack of admins/overloaded admins is not the best reason to put for your reason to apply. Yes, it's a reason. Should it be your only reason? No. Having no admins is better than having a bad admin. No, I'm not saying you'd be a bad choice, I'm just pointing it out.

As for the questions not mentioning any of what I said/intended:
These questions are meant for us to judge your ability to admin. My opinion would not be to outright deny people for having answers that don't fit the admin styles of current, but at a certain point, you have to realize they are open ended on purpose, and only answering them to the bare minimum is not something that I believe is realistically fitting the requirement. While writing a 5 paragraph essay for each question is not what I'd ask people to do, a one-two sentence response that is basically "Wait for ahelps" is very, very lazy and low effort.
In real situations you will get an ahelp or have to take the initiative and investigate something yourself. In either case, you will not have someone telling you the exact series of events and asking you what you want to do (and I wouldn't trust any series of events that I haven't personally investigated anyways, as you should do the same as people can and will lie, not saying everyone is inherently untrustworthy but logs are there for a reason, to verify events.) Investigations often times will require multiple logs to be dived into, along with many things that aren't in logs (fingerprints, anyone?), a good understanding of game mechanics, and most of all in some cases, a good understanding of the playerbase and community at large. As detailed as our rules are I have rarely come across an ahelp other than for IC in OOC or OOC in IC and related easy zero tolerance things that are black-and-white-this-guy-good-that-guy-bad. 

Ahelps will almost always require interpretation and a grey area. The rules are detailed as I've said, but they will never be able to cover every possible scenario, and that is where you, the admin, steps in. A "bare minimum" judgement in real scenarios will not suffice. You have to consider all the context and events after a detailed investigation to make a fair ruling based on our list of rules, if you want to be a good admin.

[Kenzie]

ayy lmao

[kevinz000]

kenzie with the deep replies to my deep questions.

---

you know what










ayy lmao

[Ruby Flamewing]

Leon was co-host before I got here over a year ago.
So, y'know. Take that into consideration.

And he was never removed from that position in my entire time being here, either.

[Leon_Leonardo]

Oh yeah, I forgot to reply to this. The answer is no.