/tg/Station 13

"One taste and you'll never go back, even if you wanted to!"


Unimportant Stuff:
I'm GeneralThrax, admintrainer on Manuel and having formerly adminned Terry. I've been around since early 2019, and as of fairly recently, trained 3 admins (smoted, mrrfiish, isratosh) and helped train another trainer's candidate (TheBibleMelts). You might know me as Beauregard on Terry and Piper Faust on Manuel.

Highly Unimportant Stuff (what I'm definitely probably maybe 100% going to do):

Be Highly Involved with the Training Team
This last term has been marked by some drop offs in trialmin / admin candidate activity that resulted in some failed trials and early retirements. Headmins have (god bless them, they're quite busy) been a tiny bit late to promotion shenanigans on several candidates / trialmins, and I hope to be prompt with this and keep on top of things to make sure our new admins don't lapse into inactivity.

MRP Policy
I've, more or less, been content with the state of rules and policy on Manuel. However, after having spent a bit of time on other servers and hearing a few players out, I think we could do (marginally) better.
A few things I'm intending on pursuing are:

• A modified (and likely simplified) Space Law being more important with security, in a hope to improve the current state of antagonist-sec and crew-sec interactions (preventing situations of sec unanimously deciding you aren't worth being around and giving lawyer more of a foundation to stand on)

• Throwing antagonists like changeling or pirate a rope, considering they're technically not murderbone antagonists yet because of how they are (pirate highly destabilizing the station, lings being uncontainable), crew have little sympathy in dealing with them

• A more hardline stance against starting conflicts with escalation policy, I've seen a lot of interesting rounds / gimmicks ruined by people simply looking to escalate in a "valid" manner while playing, and I'd like to usher in a harsher outlook against it for admins.

• Some genius thing players will probably whisper in my ear that I've completely forgot and will probably do later in the term

Why you should vote for me:
I've been on the team and quite active for years now, and I'm fairly involved with admin training and the Manuel community. Getting along with the other headmins shouldn't be much of an issue, I'm sure everyone running is levelheaded enough to come to an agreement and work something out.
Though I might be an odd pick for LRP players, I have spent a significant amount of time on Terry and other LRP servers before coming to Manuel, and even here I'm more lenient leaning (not necessarily a good thing) compared to some of my fellow Manuelmins.
I do very much love Manuel and the community around it, and I'm looking to take a more active stance in making it more receptive to new and returning players.

"Here we come, General. Like a chemical spill."

A very level-headed active admin who has rumbled in both LRP and MRP, a rare advantage in this race. Besides that, they're the only candidate(i think) who wants to emphasize the importance of space law for MRP.

Top pick for sure.

thraxxer is a great admin and an awesome trainer (that actually cares about server being staffed during lowpop hours). Good pick if you want someone sane!
Anyway, can you elaborate on

A more hardline stance against starting conflicts with escalation policy

Are you not content with current escalation policy? Or are you not content with how it's enforced by other admins? What's your plan to change it?

Striders13 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 2:02 pm thraxxer is a great admin and an awesome trainer (that actually cares about server being staffed during lowpop hours). Good pick if you want someone sane!
Anyway, can you elaborate on

A more hardline stance against starting conflicts with escalation policy

Are you not content with current escalation policy? Or are you not content with how it's enforced by other admins? What's your plan to change it?

RPR 2 describes starting escalation "without legitimate IC reasoning" as simply removing your ability to respond lethally in self-defence if force is "employed reasonably by the wronged party." It still lets people just fuck with others with flimsy justification. I want to encourage admins to give closer scrutiny to offending players to ensure an IC conflict is started for any reason other than a barely disguised "ruining this person's round was funny." The most I intend to do with the rule revision-wise is a reminder that purposeful escalation bait (repeated small offences solely to spark fights because they're bored irl) is not a legitimate, in character reason to begin a conflict and could be considered to be harmful to the "higher quality environment for roleplay" that is protected under RPR 1.

I have some questions.

- You describe yourself as a "former Terry admin". Several admins consider themselvs "tg admins" without the ruleset distinction. Do you believe this changes your outlook on how you're gonna be a headmin?
- Your MRP policy piece mentions Space law being important to Sec. That's another wiki page stuffed into the rules. How would you handle the risk of rules bloat?
- What does "throwing antags a rope" mean?
- Do you have any plans for LRP? Do you believe your plans for MRP would impact LRP?

Other stuff on your thread I was curious have already been responded somewhere else or it's not something of interest to me atm. Thank you

conrad wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:33 pm - You describe yourself as a "former Terry admin". Several admins consider themselvs "tg admins" without the ruleset distinction. Do you believe this changes your outlook on how you're gonna be a headmin?

I simply described myself as that because I played on terry and adminned for it the most of every LRP server. It wasn't an attempt to section myself off or anything, simply a reminder to older players of where I was. I'm fully aware we're all tg admins, and I don't intend to disregard an admin's opinion based on whether they're from MRP or not. If that's what you were asking. If not, and I'm rambling about something else entirely, I'm sorry.

conrad wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:33 pm - Your MRP policy piece mentions Space law being important to Sec. That's another wiki page stuffed into the rules. How would you handle the risk of rules bloat?

There's a bunch of these dumbass Space law books everywhere in brig that no one reads because Space Law on MRP means nothing. I want to also compress it significantly so it ISN'T a pain in the ass to read. Ideally it would simply hold officers to a higher standard and allow lawyers to actually defend clients rather than simply being told "no", and not hinder officers from being able to handle what dynamic throws at them (Wardens, Lawyers, HOS will be involved with it the most).

conrad wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:33 pm - What does "throwing antags a rope" mean?

Despite pirate and ling not being murderbone antags as defined in our roleplay rules, both are normally killed on sight. For pirate, I'd like to more heavily enforce RPR 4 for normal crew in dealing with them (notable exceptions like them drilling your department with cannonballs or slaughtering your coworkers). For ling, I'd like to either give them the full ability to murderbone (most likely, might even happen this term), or pursue some alternative like showing some leeway if the ling isn't necessarily friendly but hasn't done much (probably won't happen and open to revision).

conrad wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 7:33 pm - Do you have any plans for LRP? Do you believe your plans for MRP would impact LRP?

I wouldn't think so. My plans in my campaign under "MRP Policy" are there for a reason, and I intend for it to be MRP Policy. I don't specifically have any plans for LRP but getting some more Sybil trainers and possibly looking for Sybil candidates myself is something I'm interested in.

In matters of policy, it is inevitable that you have to be involved with potential policy changes that affect either LRP or MRP or even both, and have to cooperate with 2 other headadmins to enact policy and pass judgement on player's from both LRP and MRP. How would you do so, since you're well known as a MRP admin with past experience in LRP?

Thanks Thrax, that was very clafifying. And no, I wasn't implying you were on the "admin ruleset segregation" mindset. Although when you mentioned it, I briefly was, panicked, then continued reading lol

Maybe I was all along and didn't notice. Regardless, thanks again for clarifying.

Archie700 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 9:15 pm In matters of policy, it is inevitable that you have to be involved with potential policy changes that affect either LRP or MRP or even both, and have to cooperate with 2 other headadmins to enact policy and pass judgement on player's from both LRP and MRP. How would you do so, since you're well known as a MRP admin with past experience in LRP?

Pretty much everything I want to push the manuel candidates are (more or less) on board with, and a ton of candidates from our LRP servers have stated they plan on supporting MRP policy changes as long as it remains separate from LRP. Most of my changes aren't radical (to me, anyways) enough to cause much pushback (theoretically), any I'm quite confident I can broker a compromise if the other 2 don't like it for whatever reason. Even though I've been very absent from LRP, I did still take my approach to adminning (talking people into accepting what they did was against the rules, leniency, respecting reasonable IC conflicts) to MRP, which I do comfortably think I can bring up to rule upon LRP-related topics.

conrad wrote: ↑Fri Aug 18, 2023 9:29 pm Thanks Thrax, that was very clafifying. And no, I wasn't implying you were on the "admin ruleset segregation" mindset. Although when you mentioned it, I briefly was, panicked, then continued reading lol

Maybe I was all along and didn't notice. Regardless, thanks again for clarifying.

ye

Is there any reason to vote for you if you don't care about MRP policies ? Apart from your playtime on LRP servers ?

Hi thrax, nice to see you running!

Since you mentioned training, I’d like to ask what your philosophy is regarding it. What values and lessons do you emphasize for candies, and how do you go about teaching them? Also, what are your standards for new admins? What do you like to see in applicants, and what do you dislike? Any ultimate changes you’d like to impart on the system?

Hope this isn’t too many questions, and good luck

Somepan wrote: ↑Sun Aug 20, 2023 11:30 am Is there any reason to vote for you if you don't care about MRP policies ? Apart from your playtime on LRP servers ?

In hindsight maybe mentioning the hours of playtime on LRP was a poor idea because it's hardly a reason to vote for someone. But I'm looking to get some more admin trainers for LRP (sybil especially) and being more involved with the trialmins (giving them pointers, keeping track of hours / how active they are, etc) to prevent the extreme lapses in activity that resulted in several failed trials this term. Maybe not too relevant for most admins, but it should prevent the solo-adminning experience on high pop LRP and give us (ideally) ~3 admins consistently at peak hours.

wesoda25 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 20, 2023 2:35 pm Since you mentioned training, I’d like to ask what your philosophy is regarding it. What values and lessons do you emphasize for candies, and how do you go about teaching them?

I try to very heavily emphasize the importance of admin discretion and the strength of Rule 0 to my candidates, as I want them to realize that situations are frequently very, very different and applying concrete rules / precedents might not be the best course of action in getting a satisfying conclusion to a ticket. When it comes to directly training, I tend to cover the most important tools, but generally not doing a blanket lesson on absolutely everything (because there are admins who know far more than me about certain tools admins have access to, and I drop those names to the candidates to ask them at their own leisure).

wesoda25 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 20, 2023 2:35 pm Also, what are your standards for new admins? What do you like to see in applicants, and what do you dislike?

I tend to favour people who impact the round heavily, but in a highly positive way (an example being the rare good head of staff player). I like potential candidates who are cordial enough to try and reason with highly agitated players (admins do this a lot, after all), but still are willing to listen to genuine criticism and improve from it. While I would want to give most candidates a chance, I try to be cautious with people who tend to melt under pressure or explode when facing criticism, something you're likely to face a lot adminning.

wesoda25 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 20, 2023 2:35 pm Any ultimate changes you’d like to impart on the system?

I'd like to encourage trainers to more frequently support their candidates / trialmins every step of the way, so they'll be able to not only finish their trial but also leave with the extensive knowledge of their own trainer and other trainers on the team, which would also help catch periods of inactivity earlier instead of just finding out about them at the end of trial. Of course, this is less so holding their hand and more so ensuring they're still breathing and have a pulse.