In terms of 'staff applications' - I think that yes, there may be bias, but is there not bias when the Team typically choose the next MiT in the first place?
Not saying you have to be a Staffers best friend to earn your place, but you do have to have some sort of link with the Team and show you can get along with either & all of them, whilst also proving to be very helpful to the community and being approachable, considerate, everyone's friend, per say. You have to highlight yourself & stand out for them to consider you and one/two must actually like you for other Staff to then catch on and enjoy working with you also.
How it works isn't bad, not at all, it shows you know who you're appointing. But, I wouldn't necessarily worry about bias & the application system being abused when quite frankly the most helpful players and the most well known will have a lot of people routing for them in the first place.
Additionally, spam by trolls can be prevented by allowing only one submission per user (might require IP tracking, etc) per month/every few months, etc. so that there is space between the first, second & however many applications from the same person. Then if it's clear that the person only intends to troll or use the application form to be hurtful, they can be blocked from document/application form access as well as removed from the FH game/forums if the toxicity on display gets personal.
I also think that if there is an application form put out, the MiT position needs to be considered having a small trial period.
- Do they actually want the job? Are they just in it for the fame? Power? Can they handle the stress? Potential workload? etc.
Being in training is essentially a trial period within itself, but a trial period should come before and after the training if that makes sense.
i.e the trial period before the training will consist of making sure they're genuine to the job.
The trial period after the training is to see if they can tackle the weight on their shoulders, what they do in situations, the list goes on.
For community input into who should be Staff, I think there could be potential polls and/or nominations. Buuuut, there are obvious issues with that.