I am fairly recent to the RPG community. My first taste was LARPing in a local game called Air Maelstrom. I then settled down with a group that played Blue Planet. A few months later, we moved to Exalted and I began GMing that. Since then, I have been exploring and analyzing systems, only running the ones that really keep my attention. I am currently working on my own RPG system.
I have a background in chemical engineering and game development. As a result, I have a strong desire for a good fusion of both mechanical and theatrical elements. So I am neither in support of excessive role play to get around mechanics nor relying solely on a skill roll without any context. I prefer games which supply more than binary resolution of non-combat events and games with skill modeled by the appropriate curve.
As for my GMing style, it can be summed in these facts:
The villains will generally account for the player's prowess. This is especially true in settings where the players are exceptionally powerful (Champions, Exalted, Demon).
I don't kill characters unless there is no reasonable way around it or the player wants to make a new character. This is for a purely logistical reason - I don't want to waste time in my games waiting for you to make a new character, nor to deal with the awkwardness during that period. That said, I retain the right to do everything else to your characters.
This generally goes along with point one. But for every action, there is a reaction. It is usually not equal and opposite until you account for friction and catalyzation.
If that weren't true, the game would not be interesting. If it gets better, the game is over. All my games either end when this becomes false (a planned, shorter campaign) or when this becomes unbearable.