I feel like the wording on this poll is somewhere between poorly worded & finely minced words to generate a specific result. Whatever the goal is the poll leaves too much undefined and draws an extreme line as a secondary qualifier.
"pursuing every advantage I find" could be interacting with the world, it could be punpun & peasant railgun style rules lawyering, it could be social engineering things like the already mentioned pizza, it could be minor charop, it could be extreme charop, it could be using bonkers design choices, it could be looking for loopholes to abuse gm largesse intended to build buyin, it could be looking for ways to abuse houserules in ways the gm will almost certainly need to revise, it could even be outright catch me if you can cheating... This statement is just too vague to provide two or more people answering the poll enough information to be answering the same question in their mind
"no matter what" Alice could be cool with most of those things but draw the line at cheating, Bob could be cool with cheating but think a couple of the things Alice is cool with are too extreme to be acceptable in polite company, Cindy ,might be cool with doing all of those things but draw the line if you do it, Dave might be cool with some of those things but draw the line if a player with a wizard PC does it, Edith might be the sane as Dave except swap wizard for fighter. Frank might be cool with a bunch in a one shot but consider them beyond the pale in what is expected to be an ongoing campaign, Gary might consider a the same bunch as Frank to be fine in an ongoing campaign but a one shot is a holy sanctum not to be smeared by them... All of those hypothetical players are answering a wildly different question that considers most of the others unacceptable players but all answer no.
"pursuing every advantage I find" could be interacting with the world, it could be punpun & peasant railgun style rules lawyering, it could be social engineering things like the already mentioned pizza, it could be minor charop, it could be extreme charop, it could be using bonkers design choices, it could be looking for loopholes to abuse gm largesse intended to build buyin, it could be looking for ways to abuse houserules in ways the gm will almost certainly need to revise, it could even be outright catch me if you can cheating... This statement is just too vague to provide two or more people answering the poll enough information to be answering the same question in their mind
"no matter what" Alice could be cool with most of those things but draw the line at cheating, Bob could be cool with cheating but think a couple of the things Alice is cool with are too extreme to be acceptable in polite company, Cindy ,might be cool with doing all of those things but draw the line if you do it, Dave might be cool with some of those things but draw the line if a player with a wizard PC does it, Edith might be the sane as Dave except swap wizard for fighter. Frank might be cool with a bunch in a one shot but consider them beyond the pale in what is expected to be an ongoing campaign, Gary might consider a the same bunch as Frank to be fine in an ongoing campaign but a one shot is a holy sanctum not to be smeared by them... All of those hypothetical players are answering a wildly different question that considers most of the others unacceptable players but all answer no.