Fyni Mod Interview

Alright, so the format is simple and this is a somewhat casual interview process, so if you have any questions throughout outside your answers, feel free to interject. Basically, the interview process will be me asking a few questions, and then ending with some scenarios for you to walk me through. We will also post this interview under your application, is that acceptable?
Fyni — Today at 7:26 PM
That is acceptable yes.
Owen — Today at 7:27 PM
Alright, first question. Do you know the basic commands that a moderator has access to on Aurora?
Fyni — Today at 7:27 PM
Only some, not a comprehensive list
Owen — Today at 7:29 PM
Alrighty, fair enough. Here is just a general list of powers that you'd have initially as a Trial Moderator, go ahead and read through them and let me know if you have any questions about them so far. The ability to perma ban is not given to Trial Moderators, but would be after successfully completing a trial (if you need to ban someone during a trial, you just ask someone to ban on your behalf):

Admin PM's ("BWOINK!")
Aghosting, which allows you to pop out of your body, check something out, then click it or Reenter corpse to get back into your body. It'll show up as your character asleep on their feet the entire time you're aghosted.
Check AI laws.
Check Antagonists.
Checking the date when players joined the server.
De-Admin, which turns you back into a normal player for a round/however long you need. Hit it again to remod.
Check player notes, warnings, bans, so on.
Show player skills.
Staffwho will now show a lot more
Wind
The ability to go into someones player panel and give notes, warnings, tempbans and permabans (once your trial is done)
Defuse welder tanks by clicking on them.
You will be able to see ALL LOOCs. A little R will be in brackets for remote ones. You will also have a permanent AOOC as well as being able to read ghostchat at any time.
Access to MSAY, the Mod/Admin channel.
Viewing Variables (VV), though you probably won't use this past checking attack logs and such.
Fyni — Today at 7:30 PM
Thank you. Most of these I know what they do - having seen them in use.
May I ask, what does "show player skills" do?
Owen — Today at 7:30 PM
Okay, great! There is also a document that lists and explains all the powers that will be sent if you do get the trial
Oh
LMAO okay, that is an old list. It is from when we used to have skills that could be selected (they were just fluff, and used to keep people accountable, I assume that'll be re-added when mechanical skills get implemented)
Fyni — Today at 7:31 PM
Ah ok. So currently - it does nothing basically.
Owen — Today at 7:31 PM
Yeah, I don't know that it even exists rn, honestly. Should not have included that.
Fyni — Today at 7:31 PM
haha fair enough
ok I'm happy with the rest of them,
Owen — Today at 7:32 PM
For the second question, I know you mentioned this in your application, but why do you want to be a moderator here?
Fyni — Today at 7:34 PM
Well, quite simply I love playing on Aurora. I love SS13 as a whole, and I love roleplay and Aurora Station really combines them both so perfectly. When you've played for a long while however, it's impossible to not see rule breakers and bad eggs upset rounds and ruin moments. I've seen staff resign recently, mostly I'm sure from just not having the time, and I thought to keep the quality of the rounds up Aurora does need staff. So I want to be a moderator to help keep Aurora the amazing exprience I have - and to let other players, new and old, continue to have that exprience.
Owen — Today at 7:35 PM
Okay, great!
Alright, next question. What is, in your own terms, powergaming?
Fyni — Today at 7:37 PM
powergaming is using knowledge of the mechanics of the game in ways which break the immersion of a round and gain an advantage, usually with the intent of "winning". This can be, for example, an engineer doing advanced chem mixing or surgery, or security officers using their knowledge of antag items to ruin them (for example, clicking everything to spot someone using a cham projector).
Owen — Today at 7:39 PM
Going off that, how do you feel about the current moderation level on powergaming? Do you think it is too strict at the moment? Do you think we could do better in enforcing it? There is no wrong or right answer here, we're just interested in hearing your thoughts
Fyni — Today at 7:41 PM
In my exprience, there has been a little lax-ness about it. Players bend what is reasonable skills for their characters to have - often because there is no other option (no one is playing a certain job for example). However I appreciate that this is sometimes needed to keep a round - and story - going. When it comes to security and antags - where powergaming can make the most salt - I have not witnessed an excessive unmoderated amount of it personally, so I think the right level has been found there.
Owen — Today at 7:42 PM
Fair enough, fair enough. I agree with that pretty much.
Next question
Is it ever okay to execute an antagonist, or anyone in general? What would constitute a case where this is an appropriate action, if so?
Fyni — Today at 7:45 PM
It is absolutely ok to execute antags - but ONLY if it is appropriate. Antags must be given a chance to survive, talk, escape where possible, but some antagonists act in such a way to make this impossible. Been unable to be captured, continuing to attack when down, constantly escaping - all these situations warrant it. But the antag must first show they are acting like this before it is justified. It can't be done premptively EVER.
As for (usually antags) executing none antags, this must be done with similiar but different escalation. It needs to be appropriate to whatever gimmick is been run, and best after some roleplay leading upto it, and usually not too early in a round
Owen — Today at 7:47 PM
Perfect, yeah. That's basically what is written in our rules anyway, I just like to see if there are any other takes on it during interviews, since this tends to be a controversial topic whenever it happens.
Can you think of an example where it would be appropriate for an antag to execute someone?
Fyni — Today at 7:48 PM
I think the Aurora's stance on executions is perfect - too strict and it makes some antags unstopable, and some gimmicks undoable
If a raider has taken the Captain hostage, and is threatening to kill them if their demands aren't and/or security tries a rescue. The antag has roleplayed with the captain, and the crew over comms, and set a clear set of rules in character. Especially if it's later into the round, I think killing the Captain if security do rush or the Horizon is delaying is acceptable.
Additionally, the antag in that situation might reasonbly kill the Captain if the Captain attempts to escape themselves, perhaps drawing a gun of their own or similiar
Owen — Today at 7:51 PM
Good example, good example. Full agree with you there, and personally I try to encourage antags to be more confident in doing that sort of stuff if people are not cooperating with their demands.
Anyway, onto the last question before we move onto a few scenarios.
Fyni — Today at 7:51 PM
Of course.
Owen — Today at 7:52 PM
If you were given full control over the rules for the server, i.e., writing them and giving direction to the rules, what would you change?
Fyni — Today at 7:52 PM
Oh, that is a very difficult question
Owen — Today at 7:53 PM
There is absolutely no right or wrong answer here, but as a staff member, you'll often be consulted over various changes that get implemented. So I like to give a chance for people to voice any ideas prior to joining
Fyni — Today at 7:53 PM
The big one would be the permaban allowance. They reduced the number of permabans a player can have by one. I think it should be reverted - I'm a big believer in giving people other chances if they show they are sorry and willing to improve. This can be determined through ban appears, and another ban can be applied if not.
Owen — Today at 7:55 PM
So to clarify, the current stance is that you can appeal two permabans, but if you are banned the third time, there is no chance to appeal. You would want that to be upped to three appeals, and then anything after that is unappealable, or something else?
Fyni — Today at 7:56 PM
Yes - an extra appeal, essentially, or perhaps an upper limit on permabans been made clear ("You are allowed to appeal again after a year etc."). However, I do think Aurora is fairly lienient when it can be - else I wouldn't be applying.
It's something I'd like to see, but not something I'd go to bat over.
Owen — Today at 7:57 PM
Naturally, yeah. I think that's a fair opinion, honestly. I do not know how likely it is to see that change in reality, but I can agree with you there at the very least.
Fyni — Today at 7:58 PM
Yes. I understand it's unlikely to change - I imagine it's difficult dealing with "repeat offenders", and that most of the staff team must have agreed when it was changed.
Like I said, I think Aurora is pretty lenient regardless.
Which is a good thing
Owen — Today at 7:59 PM
Yeah, rule changes ultimately fall upon the head staff, but anyone is obviously welcome to give input whenever. In any case, that wraps up the initial questions. We'll move onto a few scenarios now. Essentially, I'll start it off by giving you a prompt, and you'll walk me through step-by-step what you would do in a situation, and give me your thought process on it. These are all open ended, and we generally just want to gague your mindset toward things. Again, no right or wrong answers here.
Fyni — Today at 8:00 PM
Sure!
Owen — Today at 8:00 PM
Also, it's recommended that you refer back to this list when going through the scenarios
If you need any clarification for them as well, I'll fill in details as needed. Alright, for the first scenario--
Fyni — Today at 8:00 PM
Of course! Gotta use all abilities I can (except show player skill) to get the truth
Owen — Today at 8:01 PM
You are sitting in the lobby and an ahelp comes through saying that a janitor just joined the round with the name "Mr. Clean." You do not recognize the janitor's ckey, and upon checking, you see that is a 3-day-old account. What do you do?
Fyni — Today at 8:04 PM
Mr Clean is a reference name. I'll send send them an admin PM kindly explaining that reference names are not allowed, and they should pick something else. (At this point, I do not have the powers to change their name or offer a respawn however I believe - would I be able to ask for practical assistant in this?)
Owen — Today at 8:05 PM
I am not sure that Trial Mods get the ability to give respawns or name changes, however, this is the power of a normal moderator, so yes, you would just ask them to help you out.

When you send the PM to the player, they respond with "I thought this was an RP server, I am RPing as a janitor, their last name is Clean, and all I want to do is clean. Why is this an issue?"
Fyni — Today at 8:08 PM
I would reply as follows: "We are a heavy roleplay server, which means characters need to have reasonable and believable names. For (Assuming they are) a human, Mr is not a reasonable first name. Additionally, this name is referencing a real life item, so is unsuitable. I am happy to help you pick another name so you can get back to cleaning!"
Owen — Today at 8:09 PM
"Yeah right. I know how to RP I don't need your help, get me a real mod!"

At this point, they start wandering around again and are pestering medical over the radio for a beaker of space lube
Fyni — Today at 8:14 PM
Ok. At this point they have been given a chance to change things - and clearly have a very LRP mindset. I would give a final chance/warning to the effect of "You are required to change your character's name to play on this server, or else you are breaking server rules and I will have to ban you/have someone ban you (if a trial moderator still!)" I would watch him to make sure he doesn't engage in any bad behavoir while bothering medical, giving a final chance to reply. If he does not reply, replies negatively or starts doing something in game unreasonable, I will ban/ask someone to ban
Owen — Today at 8:15 PM
Alright, very good lol. And yeah, let's say that they continue being a shitter and eventually need to get banned. Unfortunately, this is pretty common (more common than you'd think), but they are usually pretty easy to sniff out who is just confused, and who is here to just troll/grief.
Alright, let's move onto the second scenario.
Do you have any questions before that, actually?
Fyni — Today at 8:16 PM
Yes. I imagine it's easy to know pretty quickly the difference between confusion and been a troll!
No relevant questions no! 🙂
Owen — Today at 8:18 PM
It is toward the end of high pop and we just barely managed to roll a merc round. You are playing as your captain, and you are also the only staff member on the server at the moment. The team of mercenaries boards the ship, and within ten minutes of arriving, they kill three non-security crew and then take over the holodeck. Shortly after the holodeck takeover, they announce that they are going to destroy the Horizon so that they can declare a victory for... idk... let's say the SRF or something. They then begin preparing to activate the nuke. The first ticket comes through, and it is someone complaining that the mercs are just playing to win and that they are not driving a story at all. How would you approach this situation?

Fyni — Today at 8:21 PM
I am in a fairly essential position to the round, however I imagine by this point anything important IC has been done (namely arming sec) so I can focus on moderating. I can reply to the person who sent the ticket to ask for their perpective, however I have a fairly good idea having witnessed the round. I can open an adminpm with a member of the merc team to ask what their gimmick is, and if they can justify executing security and pushing to nuke so quickly. If the first doesn't respond in good time, I can also adminpm the others.
Owen — Today at 8:23 PM
Alright, great. To clarify, the crew they executed were not security. They were unarmed, and they were up in the D3 Cafe when the mercs stumbled into them.

The first merc that you PM responds saying, "This is my first time playing merc, I am just following along with what [Merc Leader] is having us do, they organized the gimmick."
Fyni — Today at 8:23 PM
Oh, sorry I misread that part!
Owen — Today at 8:23 PM
The person you PM'd indeed is a newer player, and has no real notes on their record
Fyni — Today at 8:23 PM
Ok, I ask them who the merc leader is, and ask them the exact same questions
It's clear this player is confused and just been pulled along in the jetstream of whoever is leading
Owen — Today at 8:25 PM
Alright, good, good. The merc leader says that they are trying to organize an SRF gimmick and that involves them going in quickly and brutally. The main goal is to destroy the Horizon, since the SRF does not support the SCC , Biesel, or their xeno-friendly policies.

They claim that they were just escalating as would be expected as someone who is here to land a big blow against the SCC.
For context, the merc leader is an older player. There are no recent notes, however, there have been several warnings in the past regarding poor antag play. No bans. The most recent warning was in 2022.
Fyni — Today at 8:26 PM
Ok. I will check this player's notes to see if they have other...
Beat me to it
Owen — Today at 8:26 PM
🫡
Fyni — Today at 8:30 PM
An older player should know better, especially if they have been warned in the past. I will tell them that even if they think such actions a justified IC, they still need to fulfil the escalation expection on the server. I would explain how they need to give the crew a chance to react to them and roleplay, and executing none security so quickly is absolutely not acceptable. If the gimmick doesn't allow for escalation, then they should choose a different one, and ask if they can change their plans this round to at least try and salvage it for everyone.
Salvage as in - give the remaining crew a chance to roleplay and engage with the mercs.
And perhaps even have some security counterplay
Owen — Today at 8:31 PM
"Does that mean we can't use the nuke then? We did all the prep work for it, it is kinda immersion-breaking for us to just suddenly change our goals last minute."
Fyni — Today at 8:33 PM
"You can use the nuke eventually, but perhaps give the crew the oppertunity to do something first. Threaten it's use before activating it, make specific threats which gives security a chance."
Basically trying to see if "proper" escalation can still be inserted.
Owen — Today at 8:34 PM
At this point, they agree to delay the nuke, and apologize.
Fyni — Today at 8:34 PM
Ok. I will issue a warning to them to in the future be more mindful of escalation, and will be sure to adminpm all the other mercs (including the new player I talked to first) and do the same.
What a reasonable guy
Owen — Today at 8:37 PM
Okay, great. When it comes to warnings, you will be given a prompt to choose between "Standard" and "Severe." There is no real distinction between these, besides how long it shows as "active" on the player end. I do not know that it is even visible on our end, ngl.

Once you select an option (I just do standard typically). You will then be given a prompt to give the warning which will be displayed to the player. After you enter that, another box pops up which gives you space to write an additional note that is only visible to staff about the warning.

Could you give me an example of what you would say in the warning?
Fyni — Today at 8:41 PM
Yes, I think this is a "standard" instance. Player warning: "As merc, immediately executed multiple none security crew and were preparing to nuke the horizon within ten minutes of arriving. In the future, be sure to roleplay and escalate towards executions and use of the nuke."

Staff note: "Was following the leads of another player and stopped short of using the nuke when asked by staff, to escalate properly." for the others and "Pushed a gimmick which forced executions and quick nuking - however, when spoken too eventually apologized and escalated properly" for the leader
Owen — Today at 8:43 PM
Okay, perfect. We're almost done. Just one, maybe two more scenarios. This next one should be a bit shorter anyway.
Fyni — Today at 8:43 PM
Sure
Owen — Today at 8:44 PM
You notice that a... let's say a warden, who an OOC friend of yours plays, might be powergaming. You noticed at the start of the round, they immediately went into the armory and picked up a .45 and loaded in lethal ammunition. How do you handle this?
Fyni — Today at 8:44 PM
Because they are a friend of mine I might be bias. In this instance I will say what I saw in msay (perhaps confirm it by aghosting) before asking another staff memeber to handle it.
Owen — Today at 8:46 PM
That is a totally acceptable thing to do. If there are other staff members available, and you are worried about potential bias, you can 100% pass it along to someone else. However, there will be instances where you are going to have to end up taking this ticket, most likely. In those cases, we just try to keep our biases in check as much as we can--so, let's assume, for whatever reason, no one else can take the ticket at the moment.
Fyni — Today at 8:47 PM
Of course. In this instance, I know that this is powergaming and I can confirm what I saw by using my tools. I will open a ticket with them. Go with a leading question, for example "why did you pick up a leathal weapon before it there was a reason?"
Owen — Today at 8:48 PM
"Lol, I don't have lethals loaded."
"I just got a .45 holstered, just in case something happens. Rubbers"
Fyni — Today at 8:49 PM
I think I have the power to confim it's leathals or rubbers? aghosts examine get to see mroe details I think?
Owen — Today at 8:50 PM
Now, there are a few ways you can confirm this. I do not know how familiar you are with VV (View Variables), but this would be an instance where that would be useful. You would be able to check to see if they have lethals loaded. In this case, they do. They are not telling you the truth.
Fyni — Today at 8:52 PM
Ok. I will have to learn how to use VV, but lets assume I know how to for this scenario. That or I can see in my chat log that they loaded it if I did see them. In this instance I think lying is so blantantly is pretty bad, and shows they are power gaming even more. I will tell them I can see that. I check their notes to see if they have a history of doing this
Owen — Today at 8:53 PM
There is nothing relevant to this case in their notes. They have a warning within the past year about DCing as an antag without letting staff know, but that's it.
Fyni — Today at 8:55 PM
hmm. I think in this instance, informing them that staff have the tools to see when they are lying like this, and it is not acceptable in the slightest. Given the lie, I think a tempban is appropriate - a few days - whereas the powergaming by itself would just be a warning or a jobban with history.
"Geared up with leathal weapons at round start as warden, and lied about it when questions" in the ban note
Owen — Today at 8:56 PM
Alright, great. Standard temp bans are 1 day, 3 day, or 7 day. All bans are placed in the form of minutes, so you'll probably have to reference some sort of conversion thing for that. But anyway, very good.
I'll move onto the last question then, how are we feeling so far?
Fyni — Today at 8:56 PM
Ah. I think 3 days is appropriate here since it is a first offence
I am feeling good actually! It's one thing to know in your head how you'll deal with things, and another to actually put it out there to be judged
Owen — Today at 8:57 PM
🫡
Great
Fyni — Today at 8:57 PM
but as I talk I feel like these are the right decisions.
Owen — Today at 8:57 PM
Yeah, there's no real issues that I've seen so far, genuinely.
Fyni — Today at 8:57 PM
Though if I do get a trial I acknoledge I have a lot to learn when it comes to VV or other things.
Owen — Today at 8:58 PM
I will be honest, I really only became familiar beyond a very basic level with VV after becoming an admin. It is confusing lol. But it is extremely useful once you get the hang of it
Anyway
Fyni — Today at 8:58 PM
Ironically, like a lot of things in this game
If this is the end, can I add an anecdote?
Owen — Today at 8:59 PM
I've got oooooone more scenario, and then we'll wrap it up.
Fyni — Today at 8:59 PM
Of course 🙂
Owen — Today at 9:00 PM
During an Odyssey round, another fairly well-known player manages to snag the Storyteller ghost role and is doing their thing throughout the round. As the round progresses, however, you notice that things have, for the lack of a better term, gone to shit. The expedition team that is down there was locked inside the Odyssey site with indestructible buildmode walls and several waves of simple mobs were spawned. The Horizon is attempting to organize reinforcements to be sent to help with the expedition, however, the Storyteller drops a bomb on the Intrepid's shuttle console, effectively disabling it. A member of the expedition who died ahelps this and argues that this has devolved into an unfair slaughterfest, and that there is no real interaction happening at this point. What would you do in this situation?
Fyni — Today at 9:01 PM
Oh, intresting! A whole new situation. I will immediately open an adminpm with the ST, to ask why they have boxed in the crew and disabled the intrepid. However, I expect it to be unlikely there is a great explaination
Owen — Today at 9:02 PM
They immediately are super apologetic, and seem almost frantic in their response. They say that things have devolved way quicker than they had hoped, and that they were last ditch efforts to try to reel the story back into what they were attempting to tell.
They also admit that disabling the Intrepid was a bad move, but it was a split second decision to stop people from leaving.
Fyni — Today at 9:06 PM
In that case, I will ask them if they are able to undo the worst of it - removing walls and deleting hidden mobs, potentially offer to help too (if I have the powers - I assume admins have buildmode, but not moderator). Tell them in the future they need to do their best to stay calm, and that disabling the intrepid should only really be done with proper escalation and and a chance for crew counterplay. Can I ask, what is the round time?
Owen — Today at 9:08 PM
Hm... It takes about an hour to get people down to the away site, let's say it is about 1:20-1:30 into the round. They've been there for a little while, but not long.

The ST agrees to remove the walls and allow people to leave again, though an admin will need to assist with getting the Intrepid up and running again, most likely.
The ST apologies again, and says that this is the first time they've played the role, and that they got in over their head.
Fyni — Today at 9:11 PM
Ok. Yes, that is far too early to go get so punishing to the crew. In this instance, I think a note is justified. It's clear they made a mistake and admit to it, but future staff need to know they've made this mistake in case they do it again since this is a command WL issue potentially. I'd ask an admin to help me renable to Intrepid so the round can get back on track.
Maybe go around and give some rejuves to crew fighting the mobs too, where appropriate
Owen — Today at 9:12 PM
Alright, perfect. I think that is about all I have then
Fyni — Today at 9:12 PM
great! Can I tell my tiny story? 🙂
Owen — Today at 9:12 PM
Yes lol
Fyni — Today at 9:14 PM
Half a year, maybe more ago, I spawned as a ghostrole. It was kataphract - I wanted to try been a unathi, and wanted to see what cool stuff they had, and maybe learn to fly. No one else spawned in the 15 minutes it took me to get the ship flying. And I was terrible at flying. I ran through multiple asteroids. Back then the Horizon got a message every time I did. I got the bwoink. "Why are you flying through asteroids". I said "I'm not very good at flying.". I forget the admin and their exact words, but it was "Ok, in the future try to go much slower so you don't fly into so much."
For some reason that's stuck with me - I can fly the overmap now, but I appreciate how difficult it is to learn things on SS13 and I know the staff do too.
I want to be that helpful hand to others in the future too!
Ok, thank you for listening. I remembered that when I should have said it when you asked why I wanted to be a moderator.