Citadel Community

BYOND ckey: GrayRachnid
Character name: Cain Well, Syllin Exo, Grayfia Exo, Langen Vittch, Exo, Gary Slab Bulkhead, Cyrella Hesse, Leris Kiden
Discord username (+user id): Gray#3333
How long have you played on Citadel?: A year and a half
How long have you played SS13?: Since late 2013
What is your timezone/general hours of activity?: EST afternoon to a little past midnight
Previous SS13 related admin experience: Yogstation previous headadmin, returned as an admin for a while after taking a break and then a year later spent the rest of my time as a retired admin. Rejoined temporarily as a headadmin at some point when they were having a headmin shortage. Currently headmin of CEV Eris.
Previous non-SS13 related admin experience: None
Current administrators who have agreed to support your application: Kevinz

Reason for application: Kevinz mentioned that there's a shortage of admins. I'd like to join in on the team and assist with what I have. I know that I come off as stubborn a lot of time, but please give me the benefit of the doubt and believe me when I say i'm a reasonable person. I'm only stubborn when a discussion is ongoing and I know my position good enough to defend it. If there's going to be some restrictions or promises i'll have to make in order to join in, I absolutely don't mind. I want to be given a chance to prove myself. I know that my list of admins who support me is.. small. But that's because I don't interact with admins much and i'm too afraid to hit anyone up and corner them into giving me a yes or no question. I don't mind answering questions about possible scenarios if the 5 questions don't cover everything in your opinion.

Apologies if my answers are short. I'm just used to being straight to the point and I tend to leave out a lot of details. If you think I didn't go over a question properly, please do not be afraid to ask me to clarify.

1. How would you engage with two players having an out of character altercation?

If it's in OOC and it's reaching spammy levels, i'd ask them to stop before muting OOC if they don't comply. If this is happening in discord, i'd ask them to stop, if it continues, i'd make sure to warn them to stop. If they still do not comply then i'd add a muted role to them(assuming it exists.) If the altercation has multiple people in it, then i'd put the channel on slowmode until things calm down, or force things to calm down.

If the altercation was a small squabble, then i'd let it go after things have calmed down. If it was big and a grudge could be left behind between the players, i'd look into making sure I resolve the cause of the altercation so that no harsh feelings are left. Discussions and arguments can help progress some things sometimes, but altercations where anger has taken control lead to nothing and it's important to follow up on them and make sure all sides reach a conclusion.

If it's even way bigger than that, then it's really a case by case basis and I cannot say what my actions would be.

2. What should an admin do if they're involved in a situation that needs admin intervention?

Straight up, do nothing and call another admin. If another admin is unavailable, then avoid admin involvement at all costs unless the situation is one of major grief.

Grief needs to be stopped to make sure the rest of the players on the server get their enjoyment, if someone is blatantly griefing and the only admin is involved, then they really need to calculate the odds and decide if they want to intervene or not. Grief levels vary, but anything that is major grief should be immediately dealt with, regardless of admin involvement.

This is also case by case, but generally if it's not grief, I will never pick up a ticket i'm involved in.

3. How should an admin determine in what way to punish someone who breaks the rules?

The type of player, their history, their behavior, context, their intentions, and what actually went down. Out of all of these, I tend to value intentions and context over all else. While behavior and history are important, I find that you can't use behavior and history to punish a player if you do not understand the context of the situation and the intentions of the player in the first place.

4. Under what conditions should an admin de-admin themselves while playing?

When other admins are online and able to cover for them. If there aren't other admins, de-adminning shouldn't be happening as that would leave the server adminless.

5. What is expected of an admin on Citadel?

This is a tough question and I imagine it varies from admin to admin. Here's my interpretation of what is expected of an admin in general. Admins are there to ensure that all players are getting a chance of having fun in the sandbox that is SS13. It's not fun to be cheated or griefed and we're there to make sure that happens. Enforcing rules is just as important too as you can't really have a running playground without some rules for people to play by. As for what is expected of an admin of citadel. I'd say that it's the same thing as the general expectations of an admin but with a few extra things. Citadel is a little different in that a lot of people are here to have a good time and ERP/RP. This means that for the people who are just here to enjoy the environment, admins need to make sure the environment stays one in which they can have a good time. If they go look for trouble then that's their own playstyle, but if their minding their own business and just playing the game, then they need to be protected from players who don't carry the antagonist role.

It's... a bit of a rough answer, and i'm having trouble putting it in words. Basically, admins are there for the players. Admins are there so that they can ensure there's a level playing ground where everyone has a chance of having fun.

+1
They've been a reputable admin on multiple other servers. They're reasonable and have no trouble in bringing up issues where needed, regardless of public, and, more importantly, regardless of staff opinion.

With a past history of adminning, and I honestly haven't had any single bad interactions with Gray, and they're a very good mentor, I'm more than happy to give this a +1

Yeah, I support this application. I used to think of you as part of the stubborn peanut gallery that butts into conversations without adding any substance to them, and I'm happy to tell you that my mind has changed, as well as that my opinion of you was wrong. Simply talking to you has disproven my earlier assumptions. As Kevinz put it best, you're reasonable.

Reading over your answers to the questions, the answer to number four is lacking; there are additional times when an admin should deadmin, typically when other admins are online: Playing as a Head of Staff, playing as Security, and playing as an antagonist. Mind you, these situations are very context heavy (exceptions apply, such as being the only admin online), and do differ between the servers. I know you know this but clarification is always good on these matters.

I was tentative toward this app for a while since the thing that stood out most for me was the argumentative nature specifically about a few rulings. You had refused input from multiple admins and demanded a headmin ruling not just once, but on two separate occasions. Admins do have their own disputes among each other, but we are still a team and that behavior did not assure me of your intention to work with the team. Coupled with some strong opinions I noticed about how the staff operates had me leaning toward a negative.

Due to the recent incident involving you getting headbanned I must unfortunately give a -1. It's not permanent and I do believe you have the experience and potential so I would certainly encourage you to apply again in the future.

AvaricePleonexia wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 24, 2019 5:04 pm

Yeah, I support this application. I used to think of you as part of the stubborn peanut gallery that butts into conversations without adding any substance to them, and I'm happy to tell you that my mind has changed, as well as that my opinion of you was wrong. Simply talking to you has disproven my earlier assumptions. As Kevinz put it best, you're reasonable.

Reading over your answers to the questions, the answer to number four is lacking; there are additional times when an admin should deadmin, typically when other admins are online: Playing as a Head of Staff, playing as Security, and playing as an antagonist. Mind you, these situations are very context heavy (exceptions apply, such as being the only admin online), and do differ between the servers. I know you know this but clarification is always good on these matters.

Hi, sorry about the lackluster answer to question 4. You're right, I could have explained further and i'll do so now. Here's when I think admins are allowed to de-admin.

If they are playing a non-essential role and there are other admins online(service, science, mining, assistants.) I consider Engineering, Medbay, Security, Silicons, and all heads of staff as pretty essential roles. While some rounds engineering and medbay could be quiet enough to re-admin, that's not always the case. If you're going to participate in the round, your focus should be on playing the round. This is all in the context of other admins being around. Security, Silicons, and any Head of Staff should not be played unless you confirm that an admin can stay around while you de-admin and play. These roles play vital portions in the round and should be kept away from any admin-information that could accidentally show on your chat log. While you do learn to not meta-game information you receive as an admin(hell, I get meta-information as a mentor too sometimes) it is still better to completely de-admin while playing important roles.

If no admins are online, I don't consider de-adminning an option. If the only admin has to leave while you're de-adminned and playing a vital role, i'd cryo out and re-admin to take their spot.

NicoDeimos wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 26, 2019 12:23 pm

I was tentative toward this app for a while since the thing that stood out most for me was the argumentative nature specifically about a few rulings. You had refused input from multiple admins and demanded a headmin ruling not just once, but on two separate occasions. Admins do have their own disputes among each other, but we are still a team and that behavior did not assure me of your intention to work with the team. Coupled with some strong opinions I noticed about how the staff operates had me leaning toward a negative.

Due to the recent incident involving you getting headbanned I must unfortunately give a -1. It's not permanent and I do believe you have the experience and potential so I would certainly encourage you to apply again in the future.

Thank you for your input! I'm sorry that you feel that way about me only listening to headmins, but I had explained myself when questioned why I would only take a headmin's input. I only remember doing this once however, and I don't mind being reminded of when the second occurrence was. The time that I did be stubborn and only request a headmin's input is due to the fact that I got conflicting answers from two admins and saw it fit that only a headmin can give me the right answer. I can dig up logs and show you how I got two different answers from Shah and Vincent. Shah replied to me first and I was willing to listen to him, but vincent came in and claimed that the topic of discussion is not true, conflicting his statement.

I appreciate you posting on my application as both positive and negative replies are precious experiences to learn from!

And in regards to my headban, it was simply a temporary three-day captain jobban given to me because I had gotten frustrated with round and the circumstances and ghosted out. After cooling down, I returned promptly in 10-15 minutes and explained my side to the admin. I had no intention to break the rules, but a moment's rage and frustration lead me to make some mistakes that I am not proud of, I hope you can understand!

Right, aside from the contrary rulings you got from Shah and Vincent there was also an issue you brought up in-game regarding silicon policy I believe which I answered. After the round you brought the issue up again in the staff forum channel on discord which a couple players and another admin (I believe it was Werewolf) gave their input but you asked for a headmin to give their answer instead.

I recall that it was the same issue in silicon policy which I brought up, I just brought it up again because I didn't get an answer from an admin. Also, I only asked for a headmin input because it wasn't an admin giving me answers. Werewolf had retired at the time and I wasn't around for when they were an admin. I still replied appropriately when Shah and Vincent came in to answer me, but I got conflicting answers.

It was the same question, the first time only players and a retired admin(which I appreciate his input but I was not sure if his words could cover my ass if I do take them for granted.)answered it, the second time Vincent and Shah gave me conflicting answers.

Make this guy admin so he can ban me again.

Jokes aside I've known gray as an admin for a very very long time (years and years and years). He's pretty much been staff here and there for most of that time and he's been pretty solid for most of that. He dropped quite a few pretty valid bans on me over the years. He's a good boy.

Keekenox wrote: ↑

Mon Oct 28, 2019 5:41 pm

Make this guy admin so he can ban me again.

I'll do it again
:goofy: