The questions:
1: How do you intend to handle admin-admin conflicts with no clear right or wrong, should one arise?
2: What is/are the purpose(s) of an admin? Why do admins have that/those purpose(s)?
3: To what extent should a player's history on non-/tg/station servers be taken into account? To what extent should that history be sought out?
4: How do you intend to work with the coders, if at all?
5: What role do you feel players should have in deciding rules, policy, and who the admins are?
6: When you need player feedback, what's the best way to get it?
7: Do you feel seniority is important? If so, how important?
8: Explain the purpose of policy, and how policy differs from rules.
9: Please explain rule 0 in your own words, and explain why it exists. Give an example of when it would come into play, either in theory or from your own experience.
10: Please describe the role of an admin, in a single short sentence.
The answers received:
Antonkr:
Spoiler:
1: Compromise is typically the most important solution. In majority of cases something simply needs to be talked out instead of yelled out. I would also contact and work within the admin team and the two other headmins to get things straight.
2: To make the game better and more enjoyable for the playerbase. An admin should act as a represenative of the playerbase, and should use his/her judgement to carry out what is best for them
3: History is important in representing the way someone plays the game. I personally dont take one small warning or even a small ban into account as it usually means a first time mistake. Bans from 2012 are also not a huge deal for me, and lack of history in the present wouldnt matter much to me.
4: By hearing out what the playerbase may say within ooc and publicizing some opinions that might have otherwise been unheard. Of course it doesnt mean I would spam every single line of ooc chat to every codwe
5: By providing feedback to the admins/headmins so they can take further action and decide from there. If majority (even if the vocal) says something is shit it typicallu is
These answers were received ~16 hours ago today. The PM also stated “Apologies for the short answers. I will elaborate on further in a reply when can get to a computer.” and “Rest forthcoming later today.” No further PMs were received before the time of this post.
2: To make the game better and more enjoyable for the playerbase. An admin should act as a represenative of the playerbase, and should use his/her judgement to carry out what is best for them
3: History is important in representing the way someone plays the game. I personally dont take one small warning or even a small ban into account as it usually means a first time mistake. Bans from 2012 are also not a huge deal for me, and lack of history in the present wouldnt matter much to me.
4: By hearing out what the playerbase may say within ooc and publicizing some opinions that might have otherwise been unheard. Of course it doesnt mean I would spam every single line of ooc chat to every codwe
5: By providing feedback to the admins/headmins so they can take further action and decide from there. If majority (even if the vocal) says something is shit it typicallu is
These answers were received ~16 hours ago today. The PM also stated “Apologies for the short answers. I will elaborate on further in a reply when can get to a computer.” and “Rest forthcoming later today.” No further PMs were received before the time of this post.
Deuryn:
Spoiler:
1: Forced separation. If you can't play nice, don't play at all.
2: Admins are there to keep the game fun for everyone. Because it would suck if they didn't.
3: I think that unless someone seems to know an AWFUL lot about the game for how new they claim, or are shown as in the DB, then it's not really worth getting our knickers in a twist about. If we're told by another server that volunteered it without being asked, maybe do something about it, depending on the severity.
4: As long as they don't fuck with the admin backend of things (ie, breaking buttons, etc etc) or make our life more difficult intentionally, I'm willing to accommodate them as best as I can with what they need.
5: Rules and policy, the players should absolutely be involved for almost everything. Essentially anything but SoS' rules. The server can't exist without players to populate it. The rules should reflect how they would like to play the game in general. The shape of the rules comes from the player base, the admins just help set the limits to it.
6: Ask. Or badmin.
7: Yes. It's easier to provide direction from a few, even if they speak from the general direction of a group, than the group itself as a whole.
8: Rules are for the player, policy if for the admins. The rules are to define what we permit within the game. The policies are to define how we as admins treat cases within said rules.
9: Don't be a dick. That's what it used to be, that's what it still should be. It means the exact same thing. Being a dick is not in the best interest of the round/server/playerbase at large. So an admin can ban you for it. If the admin did it for a shit reason, then HE'S being a dick, so he can get dunked accordingly. It does the same thing, it's just worded to be less nitpicky. Alternatively, if you were being the dick, and you got wrecked for it, the admin can choose overlook the killing based on banning the killer would be a dick move himself.
10: To keep things fun.
2: Admins are there to keep the game fun for everyone. Because it would suck if they didn't.
3: I think that unless someone seems to know an AWFUL lot about the game for how new they claim, or are shown as in the DB, then it's not really worth getting our knickers in a twist about. If we're told by another server that volunteered it without being asked, maybe do something about it, depending on the severity.
4: As long as they don't fuck with the admin backend of things (ie, breaking buttons, etc etc) or make our life more difficult intentionally, I'm willing to accommodate them as best as I can with what they need.
5: Rules and policy, the players should absolutely be involved for almost everything. Essentially anything but SoS' rules. The server can't exist without players to populate it. The rules should reflect how they would like to play the game in general. The shape of the rules comes from the player base, the admins just help set the limits to it.
6: Ask. Or badmin.
7: Yes. It's easier to provide direction from a few, even if they speak from the general direction of a group, than the group itself as a whole.
8: Rules are for the player, policy if for the admins. The rules are to define what we permit within the game. The policies are to define how we as admins treat cases within said rules.
9: Don't be a dick. That's what it used to be, that's what it still should be. It means the exact same thing. Being a dick is not in the best interest of the round/server/playerbase at large. So an admin can ban you for it. If the admin did it for a shit reason, then HE'S being a dick, so he can get dunked accordingly. It does the same thing, it's just worded to be less nitpicky. Alternatively, if you were being the dick, and you got wrecked for it, the admin can choose overlook the killing based on banning the killer would be a dick move himself.
10: To keep things fun.
Elyina:
No reply was received from Elyina
Errorage:
Spoiler:
All of these are questions where you try to see how much your and my 'ideals' match. Headmins aren't some sort of governing body who you elect and lock up in some parliament, and surround with armed guards, so that the normal people can't get to them. They are right there, among the people who elected them. None of the answers matter, because their decisions are inherently influenced by the people, and not their personal answers to any of these questions.
What tg needs is good managers, not people with good ideals.
In any case, I've answered all of these questions through action. There's no point in answering them with words, as I'd inevitably get something wrong.
What tg needs is good managers, not people with good ideals.
In any case, I've answered all of these questions through action. There's no point in answering them with words, as I'd inevitably get something wrong.
Hornygranny:
Spoiler:
1: In a dispute between admins (what would this be about?) in which there is no obvious answer, I would rely on the admin team as a whole to offer suggestions.
2: Fundamentally, admins exist to ensure the gameplay experience is as good as possible for as many people as possible.
3: It's hypocritical to preemptively ban people who have been banned from other servers, since we often tell those seeking their permabans removed to play somewhere else and get a recommendation. That said, players thought of as irredeemable or guilty of things we don't tolerate (sex crime) may not be deserving.
4: I'm already involved with the coders on a daily basis, and try and direct work to ensure the balance of the game is as healthy as possible.
5: I think the policy discussion forum works very well in this regard. Players have given reasonably good review to the policy drafts so far, and have gotten quick answers to questions they may have about the rules.
6: Depending on the subject, an in-game poll for the most reach, or a forum thread for the most disgusting.
7: Seniority generally implies an understanding of the spirit of the game and the legacy of the rules, but is not at all necessary to make good decisions. Some people burn out, others don't.
8: Policy answers the specific questions of what's allowable by the rules. Using silicon policy as an example, all questions about what you can and can't do are answered by your laws. History shows, on the other hand, that not all people are able to understand every implication of every lawset, and as such, we have a list of dos and don'ts.
9: Rule 0 exists for cases in which someone is consistently a very negative aspect of the game over a prolonged period of time and shows no ability to accept correction. The time to think about rule 0 is when you find yourself asking the rhetorical question, "Why should they be allowed to play here?".
10: Protect the fun.
2: Fundamentally, admins exist to ensure the gameplay experience is as good as possible for as many people as possible.
3: It's hypocritical to preemptively ban people who have been banned from other servers, since we often tell those seeking their permabans removed to play somewhere else and get a recommendation. That said, players thought of as irredeemable or guilty of things we don't tolerate (sex crime) may not be deserving.
4: I'm already involved with the coders on a daily basis, and try and direct work to ensure the balance of the game is as healthy as possible.
5: I think the policy discussion forum works very well in this regard. Players have given reasonably good review to the policy drafts so far, and have gotten quick answers to questions they may have about the rules.
6: Depending on the subject, an in-game poll for the most reach, or a forum thread for the most disgusting.
7: Seniority generally implies an understanding of the spirit of the game and the legacy of the rules, but is not at all necessary to make good decisions. Some people burn out, others don't.
8: Policy answers the specific questions of what's allowable by the rules. Using silicon policy as an example, all questions about what you can and can't do are answered by your laws. History shows, on the other hand, that not all people are able to understand every implication of every lawset, and as such, we have a list of dos and don'ts.
9: Rule 0 exists for cases in which someone is consistently a very negative aspect of the game over a prolonged period of time and shows no ability to accept correction. The time to think about rule 0 is when you find yourself asking the rhetorical question, "Why should they be allowed to play here?".
10: Protect the fun.
Ikarrus:
Spoiler:
1: I'd like to be the mediator between them to facilitate dialogue between them so we could come to an understanding. Depending on the issue, I may try to remain neutral. If the scism is irreconcilable then I will give my opinion. If the issue is severe, or a repeated one, I will involve the other headmins and come to a judgement.
2: To ensure a fair and fun experience for our players. The most recognized way is by resolving disputes and removing players who cause problems. Another way is to play DM and enhance the experience with custom admin events, narration, pr simply RPing as centcom.
3: Depending on the severity of the history and the reliability of the source, we should weigh them as much as we would with our own admin-notes. Consideration should be taken in for the different rulesets, however player behavior is universal and someone who makes everyone upset on one server is likely to keep doing so on ours. I'm not suggesting we ban them outright, though, we should keep it in consideration when problems with them come up.
4: I am already a prominent member of coderbus. I speak to them regularly, maintain good relations with, and am able to personally contribute improvements to admin tools (which is what I have been doing)
5: Rules affect everyone. As such, everyone should be encouraged to contribute their opinions in open-table discussions. Headmins should do their best to set their own agendas aside, consider the feedback, and make a judgement that is best.
Same goes for picking admins. While the decision should be made by adminbus in general, player feedback is a vital process that should not be ignored.
6: depends on the topic. I like to open up a discussion topic on the forums for in depth discussion, in-game polls for opinion ratings, and bumping my personal feedback thread for my own actions.
7: Seniority more or less equals experience. But in the end it's actions that matter. A well preforming new admin should be considered as equal to, or in higher regard to a lacking old admin. It takes a lot to stay on as an admin for so long, though, so respect should be given to those who can survive the burnouts.
8: as I explained in my candidacy questionnaire, Rules are set by SoS. They are much like the "constitution" of tgs. Policies are set by head admins, and serve as an extension of the Rules by elaborating on the specifics. Policies may end up being very long, but players should only be expected to be familiar with the Rules. Policies should be more geared toward guiding admins.
9: Rule 0 exists to trump rules-lawyers. It basically means if a player is a problem the. They should be removed from the community. However, it's application should not be arbitrary and the player must be warned first that their offending behaviour is unacceptable. It is very likely to be challenged, which is why it's something the headmins would need to look into, make a judgement call, and possibly write a new policy where there wasn't before. I honestly don't think rule 0 will ever have a legitimate use, though. It's more of a "headmins, please look into this".
10: To ensure that players have a fun and fair experience on our servers.
2: To ensure a fair and fun experience for our players. The most recognized way is by resolving disputes and removing players who cause problems. Another way is to play DM and enhance the experience with custom admin events, narration, pr simply RPing as centcom.
3: Depending on the severity of the history and the reliability of the source, we should weigh them as much as we would with our own admin-notes. Consideration should be taken in for the different rulesets, however player behavior is universal and someone who makes everyone upset on one server is likely to keep doing so on ours. I'm not suggesting we ban them outright, though, we should keep it in consideration when problems with them come up.
4: I am already a prominent member of coderbus. I speak to them regularly, maintain good relations with, and am able to personally contribute improvements to admin tools (which is what I have been doing)
5: Rules affect everyone. As such, everyone should be encouraged to contribute their opinions in open-table discussions. Headmins should do their best to set their own agendas aside, consider the feedback, and make a judgement that is best.
Same goes for picking admins. While the decision should be made by adminbus in general, player feedback is a vital process that should not be ignored.
6: depends on the topic. I like to open up a discussion topic on the forums for in depth discussion, in-game polls for opinion ratings, and bumping my personal feedback thread for my own actions.
7: Seniority more or less equals experience. But in the end it's actions that matter. A well preforming new admin should be considered as equal to, or in higher regard to a lacking old admin. It takes a lot to stay on as an admin for so long, though, so respect should be given to those who can survive the burnouts.
8: as I explained in my candidacy questionnaire, Rules are set by SoS. They are much like the "constitution" of tgs. Policies are set by head admins, and serve as an extension of the Rules by elaborating on the specifics. Policies may end up being very long, but players should only be expected to be familiar with the Rules. Policies should be more geared toward guiding admins.
9: Rule 0 exists to trump rules-lawyers. It basically means if a player is a problem the. They should be removed from the community. However, it's application should not be arbitrary and the player must be warned first that their offending behaviour is unacceptable. It is very likely to be challenged, which is why it's something the headmins would need to look into, make a judgement call, and possibly write a new policy where there wasn't before. I honestly don't think rule 0 will ever have a legitimate use, though. It's more of a "headmins, please look into this".
10: To ensure that players have a fun and fair experience on our servers.
Neerti:
Spoiler:
1: Oftentimes when handling a case ingame, it's not black and white, no clear 'he is shit', etc (this is true in real life as well). For admin v admin conflicts, it should be treated the same as an adminhelp. You should consider both sides, and try to come to a compromise if no side is 'wrong', and fix the issue.
2: Primary purpose is to ensure the servers run smoothly and the players are having fun.
Secondary purpose is to protect the players from assholes and griefers.
Tertiary purpose is to reflect on policy and try to make it better by suggesting changes and taking player feedback.
3: We have asked other servers for player history (bay, /vg/, etc) before in the past, and they do the same. It's fine how it is now, as it gives us a heads-up if someone's who's been banned on multiple servers joins our server and starts shitting it up. As for what extent, the way it is now is fine, where we get asked by an admin on another server for a player lookup.
4: I don't really have plans to do much with coders. I consider myself a coder for nt-station.
5: I wish players had more ways of saying their opinion then the forums. OOC has it's own problems that I describe below. I feel that feedback (as in the thread, not the players' feedback) could be improved, firstly by more accountability on part of the administrator.
6: This is a tough question that I don't really have a good answer for, as there's many ways you can get feedback but they all have their downsides.
You can talk to people in OOC but a lot of players don't really take your questions seriously.
You can talk on the forums, but some people say (and are technically correct) that the forums don't really represent all of the playerbase.
Community advocates unfortunately failed due to disinterest and certain people wanting to get rid of them.
In-game polls are useful to get a lot of data but there are people who will vote 'ironically'.
7: I hate the concept that if someone has been around for longer, that they're automatically 'more right'. Everyone's input is important (if it's a serious input), and everyone should be able to state their opinion.
8: I've made a metaphor of what policy is in a thread I made awhile ago that says:
"Policy is more then just rules for players to follow. It is a tool an admin uses to ensure that misguided players are converted to good players, that shitlers are expelled, and to make the players happy by doing the preceding two. Policy allows admins to have an established basis to apply a punishment to a problem player, that most players will, at the minimum, recognize that they broke the rule."
As for the difference between policy and rules, I didn't really consider 'rules' and 'policy' to be different things, but I guess policy is an extension of rules.
9: I personally feel rule 0 has failed in it's intention to act as a 'safeguard' for when a player does something shitty but there's no rules to cover it, for reasons I've said in a forum thread. Rule 0 has a place, but using it is risky for the admin. I know, from personal experience, that if you use rule 0 to remove a player doing something bad but there's no rule against, you run the risk of 10-15 people godwinning you (meaning, to call you hitler). That's not such a major issue, as 'whining' is required if you want to be open and want player input. The issue is when other admins harass you (yes, this is still a thing) along with the players and... yeah. I know other admins who have suffered that as well.
I know this isn't likely a good answer for that question but it's my honest answer.
10: To ensure the players are having fun.
2: Primary purpose is to ensure the servers run smoothly and the players are having fun.
Secondary purpose is to protect the players from assholes and griefers.
Tertiary purpose is to reflect on policy and try to make it better by suggesting changes and taking player feedback.
3: We have asked other servers for player history (bay, /vg/, etc) before in the past, and they do the same. It's fine how it is now, as it gives us a heads-up if someone's who's been banned on multiple servers joins our server and starts shitting it up. As for what extent, the way it is now is fine, where we get asked by an admin on another server for a player lookup.
4: I don't really have plans to do much with coders. I consider myself a coder for nt-station.
5: I wish players had more ways of saying their opinion then the forums. OOC has it's own problems that I describe below. I feel that feedback (as in the thread, not the players' feedback) could be improved, firstly by more accountability on part of the administrator.
6: This is a tough question that I don't really have a good answer for, as there's many ways you can get feedback but they all have their downsides.
You can talk to people in OOC but a lot of players don't really take your questions seriously.
You can talk on the forums, but some people say (and are technically correct) that the forums don't really represent all of the playerbase.
Community advocates unfortunately failed due to disinterest and certain people wanting to get rid of them.
In-game polls are useful to get a lot of data but there are people who will vote 'ironically'.
7: I hate the concept that if someone has been around for longer, that they're automatically 'more right'. Everyone's input is important (if it's a serious input), and everyone should be able to state their opinion.
8: I've made a metaphor of what policy is in a thread I made awhile ago that says:
"Policy is more then just rules for players to follow. It is a tool an admin uses to ensure that misguided players are converted to good players, that shitlers are expelled, and to make the players happy by doing the preceding two. Policy allows admins to have an established basis to apply a punishment to a problem player, that most players will, at the minimum, recognize that they broke the rule."
As for the difference between policy and rules, I didn't really consider 'rules' and 'policy' to be different things, but I guess policy is an extension of rules.
9: I personally feel rule 0 has failed in it's intention to act as a 'safeguard' for when a player does something shitty but there's no rules to cover it, for reasons I've said in a forum thread. Rule 0 has a place, but using it is risky for the admin. I know, from personal experience, that if you use rule 0 to remove a player doing something bad but there's no rule against, you run the risk of 10-15 people godwinning you (meaning, to call you hitler). That's not such a major issue, as 'whining' is required if you want to be open and want player input. The issue is when other admins harass you (yes, this is still a thing) along with the players and... yeah. I know other admins who have suffered that as well.
I know this isn't likely a good answer for that question but it's my honest answer.
10: To ensure the players are having fun.
Pandarsenic:
Spoiler:
1: If mediating and trying to get them to see each other's sides doesn't work, and whichever admin is handling it can't get them to make peace, headmins step in and make a ruling; in a conflict between admins, as they cannot handle their own situations, they are functionally just two or more players being mediated by an active admin who can handle it.
2: Admins exist to ensure that the most people have the most fun; they do this because a plain grief-fest is boring and monotonous.
3: It should be accounted for inasmuch as some people will have records of behavior and go to other servers to continue that behavior; if this seems to be the case, or if they are notorious on another server, or they have just started on /tg/ and are off to a terrible start, it's worth looking into.
4: If I need them to help support a server policy (e.g. https://github.com/tgstation/-tg-station/pull/3958 ) I'll request that they help out. Otherwise, they're their own entity.
5: The server is for their entertainment. They should at least help decide the rules and policies they want to apply to everyone, but ultimately those should be a choice of the admins, as guided by the headmins, because sometimes people are more self-interested than group-oriented.
6: Forum polls and in-game OoC chatter at various times of day and week are the two main methods; the former is easier to get and log, the latter gets more discussion. IRC would be good if people could be convinced to use it as a method of policy discussion.
7: Not very; at best, it indicates more experience with the rules. At worst, it encourages the (wrong) idea that experience or precedent matters more than correctness and optimization going forward.
8: Policy is clarification of the broader rules ("Don't be a dick" is a rule; "stunning people, stealing their things, and running off as a nonantag is being a dick" is a policy). Rules are the boundaries, policies are the actual specific lines of what is or isn't okay. Policy also defines the typical and maximum/minimum "permissible" punishments for things as generally agreed upon.
9: I tend to see it as an extension of Rule 1, if anything; it exists for when someone is not doing something strictly "against the rules" but is making the game less pleasant for one person or several people or otherwise being a pain. On the converse, it also means that if someone does something entertaining enough but not strictly in accordance with the rules, they can say, "I'll allow it." In essence, like any rule, it's for making sure people are able to enjoy themselves. In this case, it's a general "catch-all" for anything not strictly covered by the other things.
10: Admins enforce that fun is to be had by cooperating, not at the expense of others, outside of antagonists... if even them.
2: Admins exist to ensure that the most people have the most fun; they do this because a plain grief-fest is boring and monotonous.
3: It should be accounted for inasmuch as some people will have records of behavior and go to other servers to continue that behavior; if this seems to be the case, or if they are notorious on another server, or they have just started on /tg/ and are off to a terrible start, it's worth looking into.
4: If I need them to help support a server policy (e.g. https://github.com/tgstation/-tg-station/pull/3958 ) I'll request that they help out. Otherwise, they're their own entity.
5: The server is for their entertainment. They should at least help decide the rules and policies they want to apply to everyone, but ultimately those should be a choice of the admins, as guided by the headmins, because sometimes people are more self-interested than group-oriented.
6: Forum polls and in-game OoC chatter at various times of day and week are the two main methods; the former is easier to get and log, the latter gets more discussion. IRC would be good if people could be convinced to use it as a method of policy discussion.
7: Not very; at best, it indicates more experience with the rules. At worst, it encourages the (wrong) idea that experience or precedent matters more than correctness and optimization going forward.
8: Policy is clarification of the broader rules ("Don't be a dick" is a rule; "stunning people, stealing their things, and running off as a nonantag is being a dick" is a policy). Rules are the boundaries, policies are the actual specific lines of what is or isn't okay. Policy also defines the typical and maximum/minimum "permissible" punishments for things as generally agreed upon.
9: I tend to see it as an extension of Rule 1, if anything; it exists for when someone is not doing something strictly "against the rules" but is making the game less pleasant for one person or several people or otherwise being a pain. On the converse, it also means that if someone does something entertaining enough but not strictly in accordance with the rules, they can say, "I'll allow it." In essence, like any rule, it's for making sure people are able to enjoy themselves. In this case, it's a general "catch-all" for anything not strictly covered by the other things.
10: Admins enforce that fun is to be had by cooperating, not at the expense of others, outside of antagonists... if even them.
Spacemanspark:
Spoiler:
1: I plan to hear out both sides, and then try to make both sides happy in some way, shape or form via any means possible.
2: The purpose of being an admin is to P̶r̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶a̶l̶l̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶u̶t̶t̶o̶n̶s̶!̶ watch over the server, and uphold the rules. If admins didn't have this purpose, then all the rules would be broken (What's the point of rules if people just break them all the time with no punishment??).
3: This is a good one. I believe everyone deserves ONE chance, regardless of history. However, I think that, if they have had a bad history (Banned from a bunch of other servers, for example.) they should be closely monitored.
4: I think the coders are a valuable part of our community. Regardless of how whether or not I 'like' the coders, I'd still like to be in close contact with them. This way, we can more or less know what is going into the game and verify it, to make sure other players want this (I'd be very interactive with the players as well.).
5: Well, the players are the ones who play the game. They should be able, if they choose, to certainly have a say in all matters, via voting and discussion.
6: There are many ways to get good player feedback, but I think the top way would be to add a 'Feedback' button into the game. You click on it, you enter in what you want to say, and all of it will be put in a similar manner to logs (So all admins can read them at nearly any given point.).
7: Seniority, as in who has been admin longer? Certainly. Shows your level of competence the longer you've been one. If you're talking about age... no. People on the internet can be immature regardless of age.
8: Rules are what define the do's and don't. Policy defines the rules further. (For example, A rule is no metagaming. A policy would be the situation, such as gaining knowledge as a ghost.). [Don't know if I defined this one too well.]
9: Rule 0... well, to me, it means that admins should be able to bend the rules JUUUUUUUUSTTTTTT slightly. An example would be a bit of IC in OOC occasionally (When, and only when, absolutely needed).
10: To monitor the server and prevent grief.
2: The purpose of being an admin is to P̶r̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶a̶l̶l̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶b̶u̶t̶t̶o̶n̶s̶!̶ watch over the server, and uphold the rules. If admins didn't have this purpose, then all the rules would be broken (What's the point of rules if people just break them all the time with no punishment??).
3: This is a good one. I believe everyone deserves ONE chance, regardless of history. However, I think that, if they have had a bad history (Banned from a bunch of other servers, for example.) they should be closely monitored.
4: I think the coders are a valuable part of our community. Regardless of how whether or not I 'like' the coders, I'd still like to be in close contact with them. This way, we can more or less know what is going into the game and verify it, to make sure other players want this (I'd be very interactive with the players as well.).
5: Well, the players are the ones who play the game. They should be able, if they choose, to certainly have a say in all matters, via voting and discussion.
6: There are many ways to get good player feedback, but I think the top way would be to add a 'Feedback' button into the game. You click on it, you enter in what you want to say, and all of it will be put in a similar manner to logs (So all admins can read them at nearly any given point.).
7: Seniority, as in who has been admin longer? Certainly. Shows your level of competence the longer you've been one. If you're talking about age... no. People on the internet can be immature regardless of age.
8: Rules are what define the do's and don't. Policy defines the rules further. (For example, A rule is no metagaming. A policy would be the situation, such as gaining knowledge as a ghost.). [Don't know if I defined this one too well.]
9: Rule 0... well, to me, it means that admins should be able to bend the rules JUUUUUUUUSTTTTTT slightly. An example would be a bit of IC in OOC occasionally (When, and only when, absolutely needed).
10: To monitor the server and prevent grief.
Aurx (I'm NOT a candidate, but I feel it's only fair if I answer too):
Spoiler:
1: If possible, get other admins involved and let things resolve democratically. If I personally have to resolve it, get them to sit down and calmly explain their side to me, then get them to calmly read the other party's side, then if they still can't get along force a compromise.
2: To handle player/player conflicts and punish players as needed to correct/remove problematic behavior in order to maintain desired behavioral standards. To run events in order to keep the game from becoming repetitive. To provide help and instruction to players who request it in order to minimize the difficulties inherent in a complicated game. To do what they can to fix bugs in order to keep the game running right. Above all, to promote the form of fun and the server culture that is seen as desirable.
3: I personally don't see much difference between a player having a history of griefing here, there, or somewhere else. Obviously differences in rulesets need to be kept in mind, but who you are doesn't change just because you're connected to a different server. Of course, there's no reason to ban somebody for history alone unless they did something really bad. If a player is a fresh arrival and causing problems, it's generally worth checking to see if they just got banned from some other server.
4: I feel the best way to have the admins and coders work well together is for the head admins and the head coders to talk reasonably frequently regarding future additions, code concerns, and the intents of both parties.
5: I feel that rules should originate from the host or somebody trusted by the host such as a head administrator to create the desired framework for the server. Policy and administrative staff should be decided upon by admins in a cooperative process. Then, once rules/policy/admins have been decided upon, the players should be asked to provide their commentary which should be taken into consideration given that they are the ones with the greatest interest in the affairs of the server.
6: The best way to get player feedback is a player poll on both servers (or just one if it's a codebase matter), or failing that to repeatedly call for votes/OOC feedback. The forums aren't a representative sample of players and IRC is black magic to far too many people to be a good sample.
7: Seniority sometimes indicates a better understanding of affairs, policy, and good practices, but it's hardly ironclad. Sometimes a newer admin has better views on a subject, or a more detailed understanding. Also, given that policy and practices shift over time, seniority can also indicate out-of-date views. It should be respected as a sign of dedication, but not as a sign of superiority in any form.
8: Rules form a framework. Policy then expands on that framework with specifics and details to form a functional structure for administration. Without policy, the rules would be too vague to know if an action was allowable or not. Without rules, policy would not be based on a solid set of principles and consistency would be difficult.
9: Rule zero (it's rule one now, I'm out of date) states that an administrator may act outside of established policy or rulings if they feel it to be necessary, and that they are accountable for such actions. It serves two purposes. First, it allows for admins to handle people who are not technically breaking rules, but are clearly acting contrary to the interests of the server. Second, it allows admins to handle situations for which policy has not yet been made or the rules do not yet cover. An example of the first purpose would be the recent bans for the vore server raids. An example of the second purpose is how the ruling that disabling gravity FNR as an asimov AI was a bannable action came about.
10: To promote fun and a desired state of affairs.
2: To handle player/player conflicts and punish players as needed to correct/remove problematic behavior in order to maintain desired behavioral standards. To run events in order to keep the game from becoming repetitive. To provide help and instruction to players who request it in order to minimize the difficulties inherent in a complicated game. To do what they can to fix bugs in order to keep the game running right. Above all, to promote the form of fun and the server culture that is seen as desirable.
3: I personally don't see much difference between a player having a history of griefing here, there, or somewhere else. Obviously differences in rulesets need to be kept in mind, but who you are doesn't change just because you're connected to a different server. Of course, there's no reason to ban somebody for history alone unless they did something really bad. If a player is a fresh arrival and causing problems, it's generally worth checking to see if they just got banned from some other server.
4: I feel the best way to have the admins and coders work well together is for the head admins and the head coders to talk reasonably frequently regarding future additions, code concerns, and the intents of both parties.
5: I feel that rules should originate from the host or somebody trusted by the host such as a head administrator to create the desired framework for the server. Policy and administrative staff should be decided upon by admins in a cooperative process. Then, once rules/policy/admins have been decided upon, the players should be asked to provide their commentary which should be taken into consideration given that they are the ones with the greatest interest in the affairs of the server.
6: The best way to get player feedback is a player poll on both servers (or just one if it's a codebase matter), or failing that to repeatedly call for votes/OOC feedback. The forums aren't a representative sample of players and IRC is black magic to far too many people to be a good sample.
7: Seniority sometimes indicates a better understanding of affairs, policy, and good practices, but it's hardly ironclad. Sometimes a newer admin has better views on a subject, or a more detailed understanding. Also, given that policy and practices shift over time, seniority can also indicate out-of-date views. It should be respected as a sign of dedication, but not as a sign of superiority in any form.
8: Rules form a framework. Policy then expands on that framework with specifics and details to form a functional structure for administration. Without policy, the rules would be too vague to know if an action was allowable or not. Without rules, policy would not be based on a solid set of principles and consistency would be difficult.
9: Rule zero (it's rule one now, I'm out of date) states that an administrator may act outside of established policy or rulings if they feel it to be necessary, and that they are accountable for such actions. It serves two purposes. First, it allows for admins to handle people who are not technically breaking rules, but are clearly acting contrary to the interests of the server. Second, it allows admins to handle situations for which policy has not yet been made or the rules do not yet cover. An example of the first purpose would be the recent bans for the vore server raids. An example of the second purpose is how the ruling that disabling gravity FNR as an asimov AI was a bannable action came about.
10: To promote fun and a desired state of affairs.
Code: Select all
//Commentary on the questions: Spoiler:
Code: Select all
//1: The main purpose of this question was to see if the candidate had a plan in mind for what to do when admins started bickering and if it seemed like a plan that would work. Hopefully this question will inform players as to if they feel the candidate has the attitude needed to handle fighting admins.
//2: The main purpose of this question was to see how the candidate viewed adminship and what they felt admins existed for. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate has the right ideas about what admins are.
//3: The main purpose of this question was to see how the candidate felt about other servers, other server's admins, and player actions on other servers. It also is somewhat of a personal issue, given that I'm an admin on two servers. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate has the right attitude on external actions. It's interesting to see the vorestation matter pop up with this question having been asked beforehand.
//4: The main purpose of this question was to see if the candidate had any plans on how to deal with the major divide between players and coders that exists. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate has the right idea as to how to represent the players in coderbus. Because they really do need some representation.
//5: The main purpose of this question was to see how the candidate viewed the playerbase's involvement in administrative matters. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate properly respects the player's stake in administrative matters.
//6: The main purpose of this question was to see how aware of the divides between servers and the forums the candidate was, and their opinion gathering methods of choice. Hopefully this question will inform players as to if they feel the candidate will be able to get their opinion so the player may be represented.
//7: The main purpose of this question was to see how the candidate felt about seniority and experience, as well as how they respond to change. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate is flexible enough to handle changing times as well as uphold the traditions of /tg/station.
//8: The main purpose of this question was to see how the candidate thought about rules and policies. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate had the right ideas about what policy and rules are.
//9: The main purpose of this question was to see how the admin viewed rule zero. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate will use rule zero in a manner that they agree to be just.
//10: The main purpose of this question was to give a simple, easily understood picture of the candidate's view of admins. Hopefully this question will inform the players as to if they feel the candidate has the right idea of what an admin should be.
