Loorey Interview

As a general list of abilities you'd have as a moderator/trial moderator,
Access to msay. It allows you to speak with other staff members.
Access to dsay. Self-explanatory, you see the deadchat and can even speak in it.
Access to in game logs about a lot of things. This include LOOC, dchat, admin actions(like kick, ban, note, warn) and some things to prevent grief. Imagine Urist McUrist open a phoron tank you'll have a message stating it. Same for a fuel tank or a valve of any kind.
Access the variables of the objects on the server. While you cannot edit them, you can view attack logs on a player, who touched what the last, etc.
The ability to adminghost, basically will consider you as if you ghosted from the lobby or died. You can aghost again to re-enter your body.
The ability to Wind people. It freeze them and keep them from interacting with the game.
The possibility to AdminPM someone, and check all the tickets that have been made on the server.
The ability to kick, note, warn, ban. More in-depth about this:
Kick = Just boot someone off the server. You can set a custom message. It's not really used often, but still useful to get someone's attention.
Note = It's basically our notepad about players. It's useful for the other staff that will interact with the player, to know their behaviour and if something already happened before.
Warning = Depending the severity of something, it can be directly a warning. This one is visible to the player, and they need to acknowledge it to play on the server again.
Ban = Same thing as kick expect on a larger scale, or even permanently. A ban is often an escalation of warnings.
Every action taken by a staff member is visible on the player's ckey. Only kicks are not shown.

For questions asked you can assume you're a full-blown mod, which only really means that you can place permabans since trials can't
If you have any questions about an ability or anything else feel free to ask, otherwise lemme know when you're good for the first question
Reformed Cat — Today at 6:37 PM
Mods can actually fetch the gamelogs? Thought that was admin restricted in code.
But, yeah, no questions about it otherwise
Yonnimer — Today at 6:38 PM
You'll get logs in chat, logs from previous rounds require an admin to fetch them though
Reformed Cat — Today at 6:38 PM
ah that's what you mean, yeah fair
Yonnimer — Today at 6:39 PM
For reference this is sort of what logs look like in game
Image
Reformed Cat — Today at 6:39 PM
yeah I know how they look like :)
Yonnimer — Today at 6:42 PM
Good to start, or got any questions?
Reformed Cat — Today at 6:43 PM
All good to start, no questions as of right now
Yonnimer — Today at 6:43 PM
Alright, if you think of one at any point feel free to ask
Reformed Cat — Today at 6:43 PM
Sure thing
Yonnimer — Today at 6:45 PM
For the first question, During a traitor round you get some logs of someone throwing some frag and vis grenades in the bar, with them getting shot a moment later, eventually leading to someone making an ahelp mentioning that the antag randomly start bombing the bar and dcd, What'd you do?
Reformed Cat — Today at 6:48 PM
Having noticed the logs already as you said, when an antag does things like that they usually already have all eyes on them, if I would not be in the round to begin with / just observing I would straight up just observe the situation myself to get a full view on it. Judging that the Antag DC'd after they got shot at, that'd (from my eyes) warrant for an actual Permaban other than just a Ban from all antagonist roles, explaining in the reason why they were banned that they should make an appeal obviously, so they may explain their situation on the forum. That's usually how it goes with every kind of overly bad behaviour out of my eyesight, if they leave and you're unable to talk with them, they're getting banned until they can explain themselves.
Yonnimer — Today at 6:55 PM
Sorry for taking a sec, About thirty minutes later you get a discord dm from the person who was banned mentioning that their internet died and that's why they DCd, how would you respond?
Reformed Cat — Today at 6:57 PM
All good.

I'd be understanding about it happening and tell them that it happens, but still inform them that they need to go through the way of making an appeal and then explaining that factor there too like everyone else would have to. Internet outages happen yeah, or flying off of the server because BYOND is clonky sometimes, though everyone just griefing or doing whatever can use that as an excuse when they see they're banned all of the sudden.
Just unbanning them to talk to them in-game at that stage is pointless even if their internet actually kicked them off, and discussing the matter in discord dm's is also pretty bad in my eyes. Better to have the whole situation explained from every side on the Forum where its transparent to everyone around.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:01 PM
Alright, should be all for that question then. Got anything to ask or add before moving on to the next one?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:02 PM
Nope, can move to the next one
Yonnimer — Today at 7:03 PM
Alright, second question, During a fairly standard extended round you see some mentions over common of a janitor going around and purposely slipping with soap around the station. Although there's no ahelp, another staffmember suggests investigating it, how would you start?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:09 PM
I do not exactly know if that's logged, honestly, if it is that would make life much easier. Anyhow, I'd probably observe them a little bit, since immediately Adminpming them will definitely stop them from what they're doing and make them feel watched. If I see it myself, obviously I got the proof infront of my eyes, would Adminpm them asking why they're doing it, let them explain themselves and depending on that explanation leave either just a Note or give them a Warning, since even if he's not doing anything 'really' harmful it still destroys the atmosphere of Roleplay and just gets others angry, causes unnecessary conflict etc. If I don't see it myself, I'd see if there's logs about it, I'd start with talking to the players that mentioned it over common via Adminpm and see their sides of the story, since obviously they must've seen it. If I gathered what I need from those players, I'd do the same as before, approach the Janitor's player via Adminpm, but this time inform them that there were players reporting it and ask them for an explanation, then give them a Note / Warning depending on how they'd explain it.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:13 PM
There's no logs for this, but in this case you would manage to spot them looking for people to drop soap next to then pulling them into it, pretty much just saying "Gotem!" before moving on. When you dm them telling them to stop they sound disappointed but otherwise agree to stop. In this case, would you give them a note or a warning?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:15 PM
They haven't caused any serious trouble for anyone, just mostly a bit of memery. I don't see how that'd warrant a warning, especially since they've been apologetic too. If they actually agree to stop and do so, it would just be note worthy.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:17 PM
Alright, they do seem to stop for a bit and the round moves on, but after around 20 minutes you get an ahelp about the same janitor hacking into maint doors and trying to get into somewhat secure areas, how'd you respond?>
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:21 PM
I'd Adminpm them again, keeping in mind that they've previously gotten a note and ask them why they're trying to get in there, there should be no valid reason for them to hack their way into any areas as Janitor, especially since (well, heavily depending on the character's background and all) there's also no reason for any ordinary Janitor to know how to hack into areas. I'd talk to them about that, get an explanation from them though this time - seeing as they were previously noted in the same round, I'd give them a warning for just continuously causing havoc in the round, put into the reason that they've been previously noted for lrp behavior and that it's now taken up to a Warning because they've been continuing to do so, just in another way.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:23 PM
In this case they respond essentially saying they just wanted to see what was inside since they were new to the server, mentioning that the round was fairly slow so they thought it could also add a bit of spice to mess around like this. Would this change anything/would you respond to this in a certain way?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:27 PM
Well, first I'd probably tell them that they should familiarize themselves with the rules, setting and their actual role a bit more since it's a HRP server and a bit different behavior is expected. Even though they're new, I'd probably still stick to a warning in this case. If they want to know what's in an area they do not have access to from an IC perspective they can ask and from an OOC perspective they can take a look at the map. Being new and or just not reading the rules doesn't make punishment any lighter. A warning is not that severe of a punishment for a repeat-offender and will likely actually make sure they think about it a bit more other than just an Adminpm with a note they cannot see themselves.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:29 PM
Alright,in this case they acknowledge it and move on, while they do finally stop, they also dc about thirty minutes later. Is there anything you'd add to this, or leave it there?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:31 PM
Do they just DC somewhere or properly leave the round via Cryo/Residential? Either way, since they're playing a very very non-essential role I'd likely just leave it there, someone will eventually bring them to cryo, if it isn't myself if I'm not in-game. You could argue that it's worthy of a note of them just DCing but I'd decide against it.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:32 PM
Just dcd in this case in their closet. But if that's all then that should be it for the question
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:33 PM
Well if they're DCing in the closet and probably closed it too then it's different from them just DCing in some open area, in that case I'd note it . But yeah, that's about it.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:35 PM
Alright. Ready for the next question?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:36 PM
Yup
Yonnimer — Today at 7:39 PM
Alright, for the third question. You late observe a burglar round towards the end of it with an ahelp mentioning that the burglars haven't really done anything all round other than just be stealthy in maint, how would you respond?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:45 PM
So, first off, antagonists have a certain freedom to influence the round how they'd like as long as it does not break any rules or just straight up destroy the round for other players, which would make the behavior of Burglars being mostly stealthy completely fine. Though, the main reason Antagonists are in a round, is to make the game more fun and engaging for everyone and create opprotunities for Roleplay beyond what happens normally in the round. I'd likely start with speaking to them in AOOC, maybe even asking how they plan on getting off the Horizon, if they're planning on leaving bigger hints for security or straight up busting themselves or just stealthily leaving. If they just plan on leaving right after I'd explain to them that it's not the point of antagonists and leave a note for them both, it's bad antag play in my eyes, totally, but it's nothing that warrants a ban from the role or antag roles overall if it's the first offence. If they've just stealthily left already, I'd probably communicate with admins to get them back to the Horizon (I've seen this happen) and actually create roleplay for people that way. If it's not their first offence of bad antag play I'd leave a warning instead of just a note, it's not the point of Burglars to totally-under-the-radar steal everything in the vault or wherever from and just leave again.
Yonnimer — Today at 7:50 PM
In this case, when asked the burglars say they didn’t want to just be shot by security so remained largely stealthy, but did interact with operations and science while stealing and tried to with engineering just no one was around. They try to argue that there wasn’t much else they could do besides that but that they did try. How would you respond?
Reformed Cat — Today at 7:54 PM
If they've actually interacted with people in the round, as you said Operations and Science, and attempted to interact with the Engineers, instead of just ransacking the Departments and taking everything that's not bolted down without words, then this would totally change. I'd likely cherry-pick people out of Science and Ops to confirm that interaction actually happened, though. Not every antagonist round has to end in a security chase, I was assuming no interaction occured at all above. If it's actually confirmed they interacted with people throughout the round and now plan on just leaving back to their base, this would be totally fine in my eyes, and I wouldn't note or warn them whatsoever. Explain to the person that made the initial Adminhelp about the interactions and that antagonists have the freedom to plan out their interactions however they wish and they haven't been sitting around doing nothing.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:00 PM
When asking the departments about what happened most of science and operations say about the same thing, they came in and help them at gunpoint, cuffed them and asked where the valueables are/not to try anything funny, they looked around before eventually leaving and uncuffing them, calling security after. Would this changehow you respond to the person ahelping?
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:03 PM
Yeah, that's not any fun interaction in my eyes, that's quite literally just disabling the workers in the department and ransacking the entire thing. I'd go with my initial response then, but in addition talk about them how that's not really any big kind of 'interaction' or any good roleplay after all, moreso just inconveniencing the players in the department and making their round boring for the time being. My initial response being the noting of the / the warning if they're repeat offenders of just generally bad antag play.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:04 PM
In this case they'd have no relevent notes or an overly long history, but they do ask what could they have done to keep the crew more involved without being shot
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:07 PM
I'd keep it at a note then. Though now what they 'could have done instead' becomes very subjective, you can create a storyline out of most things that happen, in the past I have worked together with people of the Horizon as a Ninja for example, where I just explained some situation to them, told them that X and Y will happen if they do not cooperate and involved them in my gimmick. That's what they could've done, somehow involving the departments they went through in their gimmick, getting them into their boat, or doing whatever to make their rounds for instead of boring.
Playing an Antagonist role generally should mean you have the ability to think of a fletched out gimmick or come up with situations that'll make the round fun for people on the spot.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:15 PM
Alright. They acknolwedge it and the round ends. Got anything else to add or good to go to the final situational question?
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:15 PM
Nope, ready to move to the final one
Yonnimer — Today at 8:18 PM
Alright. During a merc round you get an ahelp from one of the mercs saying that security randomly swarmed them only a few minutes after entering with most of the armory/heavy weapons and armor despite the mercs looking like normal people, no armor but with weapons in holsters. They say they think security escelated way too quickly, how would you respond?
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:21 PM
First of all I'd ask them how they approached the Horizon, was there any Announcement regarding their arrival they made? Did they just silently fly in without the cloak enabled so there would be a notification that a shuttle is arriving? Either or, Security definitely escalated too quickly but this still affects it a little. I'd watch over Security and check their equipment via Examining/VV and then try to find out who gave the order to arm up in the first place, or if there was someone that made a call that a threat is approaching and they need to get ready, because that person is responsible for it happening, the other players are just simply following orders at that point if actually given by a higher-up.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:26 PM
They say the cloak was on so they just flew in silently, the plan was to do a heist/payday gimmick where they came in cleanclothed and were going to ditch their weapons before sec ran up to them. In this case they have most of the armory out, heavy armor, rifles, ect, and it was the warden who ordered sec to be armed up but you can't see their reason why through the chatlogs you have.
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:29 PM
If the cloak was on, the first question is: How did security actually know about this in the first place? Did someone see them?
I'd definitely Adminpm the warden asking why the order to arm up was given, seeing their stance on it. They're not directly a higher-up over the Security Department but certainly a person of trust and able to hand out armament, so they're responsible for it at this point. There's no actual excuse for security to arm up like this in the situation, except through some really really bad miscommunication.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:31 PM
When pming the warden they mention that they were doing patrols up on the top floor and saw the ship had docked unannounced so ran back and got security armed.
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:37 PM
Right. That confirms that it's the wardens fault and they are pretty much responsible for all that happened. I'd explain to them that first of all patrols shouldn't be their primary concern as a Warden, their job is to maintain the brig, maintain security equipment and generally help overseeing security operations, coordinating officers. They can of course leave the Brig to do certain things but should not be patrolling like Officers. Next up I would explain to them that just because of a ship arriving without announcement, there is no confirmed immediate threat and no reason to arm up security to any heavy longarms, it's absolutely enough to get Officers to investigate and contact the vessel / coordinate with command or bridge crew to contact the vessel if there are any. What's their tone throughout the convo? Are they understanding about the situation or mad about being Adminpm'd? If they're no repeat-offender I would give them a Warning about the situation, since they just destroyed the Merc gimmick completely. If they're a repeat offender or they are being mad and rude about the whole situation in Adminhelps and don't want to admit the mistake, I'd take it to a temporary ban (or depending on their entire history, even a permanent one with appeal after x-y time) from Security Roles. Besides that I would go over the Security Officers to see if any absolutely excessive force was applied by anyone of them and talk to them if need to.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:41 PM
During the convo their tone seems rather bland/ not really rude or overly understanding, they say that a ship randomly docking with the horizon is a massive cause for alarm based on previous events and where the ship is currently, if security wasn't armed initially they'd have died if they were hostile pirates or SRF. Looking at their notes the only real relevent ones are ones for metagaming a traitor and impropser escalation as an antag themself. When talking to officers two of them mention they weren't really told why they got armed just that their's a potentional threat, with the investigator not even being told what's happening without a message on security about it until a shootout started
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:44 PM
Yeah, at this point I'd give them a temporary ban from Security Roles and explain to them why, given their history of metagaming a traitor out of a round and improper escalation (which they've done again, in this case). Explaining to them that they should have communicated better with Security overall, explain the situation to the Officers and especially to the Investigator.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:46 PM
They essentially call bs and say they feel they were justified and plan on making a staff complaint but otherwise stops there. Is there anything else you'd add or talk to anyone about?
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:47 PM
There's no point in arguing any further. I'd just wait on their forum post, explain the situation from my side on said post, once it appears, and then just have other staff members handle the complaint as usual.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:48 PM
Alright. Should be all then for the situational questions, rest shouldn't take long
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:48 PM
Alrighty
Yonnimer — Today at 8:49 PM
It's mentioned on your app you staffed for another server in the past, would you mind saying which? Largely curious in case there's any differences in powers or anything from there to here so we'd know if we'd need to explain anything
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:50 PM
It was a tg-based server, but that was also quite some time ago now, I think I also mentioned that I don't even remember the name on the app (because I don't), was a rather small and tight-knit community. Though from the code-side, I know aurora and the bay base generally quite well and I debug things here and there so I know what most verbs are used for. Though a round-up on abilities wouldn't hurt either.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:54 PM
Should add, if you do get accepted as a trial you'd get a more in-depth list of admin powers compared to the initial list I sent.

Also for the second question, a staff member mentioned that they see you largerly on at times when there's less staff around, do you have any concerns with that/not being around as much to have things explained/get help in that regard?
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:56 PM
Due to my timezone I also play a lot of rather lowpop rounds or rounds where there's just not many staff members or none at all, yeah that's right. Don't really have an issue with that, I think I'd be pretty comfortable with working independently, no concerns from my side.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:57 PM
Alright, got any questions or comments before ending the interview?
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:57 PM
Nope, not questions really, all fine on my side :)
Yonnimer — Today at 8:57 PM
Alright, final question then
You alright with this being posted on your app?
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:58 PM
Does it have to be done? Just curious. But sure thing, go ahead, no problem with it
Yonnimer — Today at 8:58 PM
If it's requested we could just keep it between staff
admittely no one has ever said no though lmao
At least in the interviews i've done
Reformed Cat — Today at 8:59 PM
Ah fair. Nono it's fine, you can post it on my app, all good.
Yonnimer — Today at 8:59 PM
Alright, should be all then