Announcement The Rules and Procedures of Sufficient Velocity

[Cetashwayo]

Contained in this thread are the rules and procedures of Sufficient Velocity, indexed and threadmarked for easy navigation.

Our Mission

Principles for Posting

Rule 0: The Mission Comes First
Rule 1: Follow the Terms of Service
Rule 2: Don’t Be Hateful
Rule 3: Be Civil
Rule 4: Don’t Be Disruptive
Rule 5: Don’t Make it Harder For Us to Do Our Jobs
Rule 6: Acceptable Content on SV
​

How Things Work

Sanctions​

Infractions & Warnings
Threadbans and Specific Sanctions
Automatic, Manual, and Indefinite Suspensions​

Administrative Reviews
Appeals​

Using an Advocate
Making Appeals and the Four Corners Rule
Special Appeals
Arbitrator Decisions
Appealing Arbitrator Decisions
Automatic Tribunals
The Tribunal Process​

The Community Council
Advocates
​

Staff Policies

Issuing Infractions
Report Queues
Resolving Reports
Managing Tribunals
Application of The Rules
The Role of Authors/Thread Creators
Using Multiple Accounts on SV
Advertising & Commercial Use
SV Does Not Provide Professional Advice
Suicide Threats and Ideation
Human Resources​

Staff Selection
Staff Training
Staff Confidentiality
Staff Conduct Off Sufficient Velocity
Official Communications Channels
Misconduct and Administrative Review
Staff Roles​

Directors
Administrators
Moderators
Arbitrators
Operators
​

 

[Cetashwayo]

Our Mission

We are enormously proud that Sufficient Velocity has grown into the vibrant and thriving global community that it is today. We intend to continue along the path that we conceived in April of 2014: to make Sufficient Velocity a welcoming, inclusive and open space, which encourages creativity, friendly discussion, and robust and honest debate.

Our mission is to balance our community values: celebrating and encouraging the artistic and intellectual expression of our members; ensuring the ability of our members to freely and productively express themselves; ensuring that the privacy and safety of our members is respected; ensuring that we have a community which is open and inclusive, without harassment or hate; and ensuring that our community is peaceful and law-abiding.

The most basic mechanism for establishing our values is our formal set of rules and policies. Our dedicated moderator staff attempt to ensure that this minimum standard of conduct for the forum as a whole is respected. But these rules are not a wall around the Staff, beyond which they cannot act; they are merely the lowest floor for what we expect from our users. We encourage, and we will act to ensure, that our values themselves are respected even where this requires actions that go beyond the rules set out here.
Yet history has demonstrated that the foremost safeguard against tyranny is not an armed citizenry. It is the existence of, and respect for, the rule of law and the concepts of good governance; and the systems of independent review that exist to protect those things.

That's why we believe that we have created something special on Sufficient Velocity. Our Community Council, made up of your representatives, can observe our actions and participate in policy-making and enforcement at every step of that process. And when the policy is made and the rules enforced, we have a process whereby independent Magistrates and the Council itself can review the application of that policy for fairness, consistency, and reasonableness.

Ultimately, Sufficient Velocity is like any other community. You have a choice: you can vote with your feet and with your voice. Your suggestions, whether communicated through the News and Management forum or through your Councillors will influence our values, our policies, and how we implement and enforce those things.

Your involvement is crucial to making Sufficient Velocity a place you want to be. No one can guarantee that you will get what you want; but you must be, and speak up for, the changes you want to see.​

 

[Cetashwayo]

Principles for Posting

Rule 0: The Mission Comes First

The Rules are not a suicide pact; we are building a community, not Kafka’s Online Parlour. Something can comply with the rules as written and still be unacceptable; and something may be against the rules but allowable anyway.

• If you demonstrate a consistent unwillingness or inability to participate on SV in good faith, you may be removed, entirely aside from violations of the rules.

The Fine Print

We follow the “pirate principle” when it comes to Sufficient Velocity. Piracy is more than breaking the law; it is a lack of respect for the law’s ability to govern behavior. If you demonstrate a persistent unwillingness or inability to respect the rules - which is not the same thing as occasionally breaking them - you will be permanently removed from SV.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Rule 1: Follow the Terms of Service

The Terms of Service are the legal agreement which allows you to use Sufficient Velocity. Failing to abide by those terms, or indicating you will not intend to abide by them, is grounds for immediate removal from Sufficient Velocity.

• The ToS supersedes everything else on Sufficient Velocity. None of the staff can give you an ‘exception’ from those rules, they cannot interpret them on behalf of Sufficient Velocity, and they will not give you advice on how to follow them.
• The ToS prohibits obscenity, child pornography, threats of violence, hate speech, harassment, spamming, and other criminal (or possibly criminal) activity.
• The ToS also prohibits you from using technical measures that circumvent any system on SV, use SV in a way it was not intended to be used, or access it in any way that might be abusive.
• By posting something on SV, you’re telling us that you have the right to post that thing on the internet, and you give us the right to display it and use it for SV-related purposes.
• By registering on SV, you give up any right to sue us for anything that might happen on, or as a result of, SV, and specifically, you agree to be subject to the disciplinary system of SV.

The Fine Print
The Terms of Service are the legal agreement between our visitors and Perihelion Media Works Ltd., the corporation that runs Sufficient Velocity. You are expected to follow the Terms of Service. Failure to do so will result in your removal, without appeal.

The Terms of Service are within the jurisdiction of the Corporation alone, and the Corporation has delegated the authority to interpret and enforce them to the Directors. The Staff of Sufficient Velocity are not employees of the Corporation and they cannot speak on behalf of the Corporation. While the Staff can certainly ban you under Rule 1 if they think you have violated the Terms of Service - and they will - it is ultimately the Directors alone who make the decision about whether or not the Terms of Service have been breached and what the appropriate response is.

The Terms of Service prohibit obscene materials being posted on Sufficient Velocity. Obscenity is anything which strongly offends prevailing community standards. It includes, but is not limited to, child pornography - whether written or visual, real or virtual - and anything which glorifies or encourages criminal activity. This standard is, by necessity, flexible and is at the discretion of the Directors.

The Terms of Service prohibit threats of violence, hate speech, and harassment. That includes not only specific threats made to, or harassment of, other users on SV; it also includes exposing anyone’s personally identifiable information (“doxxing”), whether or not that person is a user on SV or not; advocacy of violence against any real person; and anything that would tend to encourage hatred for a group or individual.

As a general rule, we will not delete content from SV on request. We may soft-delete (i.e., make invisible) limited content for good reason, but Staff cannot perform hard-deletions (actual removal) or broad-scale deletions. You should assume that the things you post are public, and that genie cannot be put back into the bottle. Exceptions may be made to the best of our ability for copyright claims, threats, illegal materials, and so on.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Rule 2: Don’t Be Hateful

We want to build a welcoming community. You can’t post anything that is hateful or advocates harassment or violence, even against fictional or historical people. Be mindful in everything that you post.

• Be understanding of other viewpoints and perspectives.
• Be considerate of how your opinions and statements can be interpreted by others.
• Don’t use slurs.
• Don’t talk about how great it would be if someone was raped, tortured, maimed, etc.

The Fine Print
“Don’t be hateful” is about how what you say speaks to groups of people. For example, while slurs might offend a specific individual, they also generally offend communities. You are mindful not because of specific individuals, but because of all those who might be affected by what you say.

We expect, for example, that you will gender everyone appropriately. We expect that you will not refer to anyone by what might reasonably be considered a slur: don’t use “retard”, “japs”, or “traps”, for example.

We also expect that you will treat others with a modicum of civility and dignity. In particular, you must be willing to treat them as people. Revenge fantasies (Internet Tough Guy-ing) - whether against fictional groups, like the Na’vi, or against real groups, like the Taliban - are unacceptable. While there is more leeway when it comes to historical or fictional groups, a community that is willing to devalue outsiders is not the welcoming one we are trying to build.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Rule 3: Be Civil

Be courteous and decorous to everyone you deal with. It is possible to disagree, even vehemently, with people (both on and off the site) in a constructive fashion.

• Respect the privacy of others. Don’t take information obtained from private conversations or restricted threads and post it publicly without permission.
• Respect the participation of others. Attack arguments, not people. Don’t post personal attacks or insults, or join a thread for the purposes of attacking someone else.
• Respect the site itself. Don’t threaten to report someone or ignore them. If you are going to use those features, let their use speak for itself.

The Fine Print
If “Don’t Be Hateful” is about how what you say speaks to groups, “Be Civil” is about how what you say speaks to specific other people. Civility is ultimately about keeping the thousands of daily interactions between users respectful.

It’s easy to be mean on the internet. You are not face to face with the people you’re talking to, and online culture often encourages being abrasive and uncouth. But you are still talking to people, and - despite what nursery rhymes would have you believe - words can actually hurt. Ill-chosen, they injure individuals and they make our site more toxic.

At its most basic, incivility is trying to crowd out others. Personal attacks, insults, extreme condescension, threats (particularly those relating to the report system or the ignore system, which are often grandstanding) and a feeling like their private thoughts will be used against them all push users away from Sufficient Velocity, and are not tolerated.

This doesn’t mean a vigorous debate is prohibited. But it means you need to “play the ball and not the man”. Posts need to focus on opinions, positions, and ideas - and not on other users. Maintaining civility encourages it in others and builds a better community.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Rule 4: Don’t Be Disruptive

Be constructive in a way that enhances the experience of everyone you encounter. Don’t act in a way that would disrupt discussions on Sufficient Velocity.

• Respect the experience. Don’t post unwanted spoilers, off-topic materials, lots of memes or images, or complex or unpleasant formatting.
• Respect the arguments. In discussion, we expect you to be honest, clear, concise, and willing to engage with others.
• Respect the nature of discussion. The more controversial an opinion, the more likely it is to spin the discussion out of control: be mindful with controversial opinions and ensure that they maintain an appropriate tone.
• Respect other posters. Don’t post with the intention of specifically getting a rise out of someone, don’t mock or taunt others in your signature or with your avatar, and so on.

The Fine Print
“Don’t be Disruptive” is how what you say affects other users’ experience. When your posts are unreadable, misleading or dishonest, you make it harder for others to enjoy the site and you disrupt their participation in it. If hatefulness is about groups, and civility is about users, then disruption is about the discussion itself.

In discussion and debate, we expect a certain threshold level of behavior: we expect honesty, clarity, conciseness and a good-faith willingness to engage with others. That means writing in a way that can be understood; it means not posting enormous, unnecessary walls of text; it means not misleading others about sources; and it means engaging with arguments with the intent of communicating your opinion or presenting facts. If you aren’t doing that - whether intentionally or because your posting is of such poor quality - that’s a problem.

This is particularly important when an opinion is controversial. It isn’t our desire to stifle discussion or debate, but staking out controversial positions inevitably encourages an aggressive response. The more controversial your opinion is, the more effort you need put in to ensure that the tone of the discussion remains positive and constructive. For example, a soldier being allowed to kill another soldier in wartime is not particularly controversial; being allowed to shoot someone in self-defense is more controversial; being allowed to shoot someone who has stolen your neighbour’s TV in the back while they’re fleeing is very controversial, and needs to be raised and discussed carefully and mindfully.

This extends to threads (or posts) whose primary purpose is raising “this is bad”. These which often have the sole or primary purpose of riling people up, are not appropriate.

Yes - this means that the Mindful Discussion Principle from News & Politics is now a part of Rule 4, and applies everywhere on the forum.

A number of other behaviors - while not necessarily offensive to discussion - are disruptive because they make discussion more difficult or raise the barrier to entry for others. Posting long spools of quotes snipped out of posts and responded to individually - “spaghetti posting” - is confusing and frustrating for users who are just browsing. In a similar way, certain sourcing practices - articles or videos in a foreign language without a translation or explanation, articles behind a paywall, videos without text, and so on - make it very difficult for users to participate in a conversation. If you are intending to rely on these kinds of materials, you need to make an effort to identify, isolate, and summarize the relevant parts in your post.

Commonly called "necroposting", posting in threads long after the last reply is not in itself disruptive. However, contentless complaints about "necroposting" are disruptive and can be infracted. If a post long after the last reply is disruptive, that would be because of some other reason entirely unrelated to how long after the last reply it was made.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Rule 5: Don’t Make it Harder For Us to Do Our Jobs

Our staff - from moderators to administrators - are all volunteers. Don’t do anything that makes what they do more difficult or that causes trouble for Sufficient Velocity that we then need to invest time and effort into cleaning up.

• Don’t create multiple accounts without staff permission.
• Don’t encourage other users to break the rules.
• Don’t argue with the staff about the rules, or a staff decision, in a thread;
• Don’t file reports in bad faith;
• Don't use Sufficient Velocity as a launchpad for something that might be an issue elsewhere.

The Fine Print.
We have a robust appeals process. If you think the staff were wrong in a decision they made, or you believe they have treated you inappropriately, the appropriate response is to file an appeal. Attempts to respond to staff doing their jobs in a thread - whether that’s saying thanks, grandstanding, or arguing with, or complaining about, the staff decision - just disrupts a thread further and makes life more difficult for everyone.

If you have a question about your infraction, send a private message to the staff member who applied it or ask us in Ask a Private Question; don’t raise it in the thread you were infracted in.

If you have a staff problem that isn’t encompassed by an appeal - for example you have a sensitive complaint about a staff member - feel free to reach out to a member of the administrative team or a Director directly.

If you have a question, complaint, or suggestion about the policy behind a staff action, please raise it in the Ask A Private Question forum, or with a member of the Council.

This also applies to the report function. Abusing it to make a point, or just because you want to annoy the staff, will not be tolerated. We want to encourage use of the report function, and using it in bad-faith only hampers that goal.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Rule 6: Acceptable Content on SV

Sufficient Velocity allows content which contain elements (such as sex scenes, drug use, and violence) which may be uncomfortable for some readers, as long as that content is handled maturely. We do not allow content which is pornographic, sexually or violently exploitative, or which exploits the participation of minors.

• Content on Sufficient Velocity may be aimed at mature readers and they may contain mature elements, but they cannot be pornographic or exploitative.
• Posting high-impact content is a privilege, not a right. If you can’t handle it maturely, don’t handle it at all.
• Handling content maturely is not fetishizing or glorifying violence, hatred, or abuse.
• Handling content maturely means including high-impact elements harmoniously and appropriately within a greater context.
• Handling content maturely means making it clear what you’re posting in advance - by tagging it - so that people who aren’t interested don’t have to read or see it.
• Content may depict minors, either incidentally or primarily, but where works depict minors, they must do so in a way that is situationally appropriate and sensitive to the presented ages of the individuals involved.
• Content which depicts minors in situations that are sexual or violent - and which may violate local laws against child exploitation content - may violate Rule 1.

The Fine Print
SV is not, and is not intended to be, a family friendly website. However, it is also a publically accessible, publically visible website that is promoted far and wide. As such, there are lines which we do not wish to be crossed.

Be aware of the links you are posting. If the site you are linking to has pornographic advertisements (such as some of the *boorus, for example), you may run afoul of this rule.

Avatars and signatures - because they are visible everywhere on the forum on every post - are held to a standard higher than regular posts. Nothing in your avatar or signature should be anything that might plausibly be offensive to, or inappropriate for, any age of audience. It's the same with usernames, and we will change usernames we deem inappropriate or offensive.

Be considerate with the images you post on the forum. Not all users have the same level of tolerance for squick or sexuality, and they may be browsing the site from work or in public. Your posts should be “scroll safe” - if someone glances over the shoulder of a browser and catches a glimpse of the post, there should be nothing that raises an eyebrow, because risque or gory images will be spoilered and tagged.

Text is generally treated more liberally than images. In addition, it can sometimes be tricky to find a balance between creative freedom on the one hand and, on the other hand, appropriate and welcoming standards of good taste. This is a task that various voluntary and involuntary movie rating agencies have attempted over the past century, with no significant amount of success. Our goal is to create a place where individuals both feel welcome and can decide what they want to see - without being surprised.

There are generally four gradations of content on SV, and they should be handled in a progressively more mature fashion.

The least mature content - the kind of thing you’d find rated no more than PG-13, like episodes of Star Trek or My Little Pony or what have you - there are essentially no restrictions. Nothing need be spoilered, and it can be as terrible as you like.

E.g. two adults wake up next to each other in bed, a Klingon is vaporized by phaser fire.

Content which has mature themes but is also widely acceptable - Lingerie advertisements, Mass Effect Andromeda, Dragon Age: Inquisition - (where sex and violence are implicit and/or handled in a larger context), should not be pornographic and should be handled with at least a minimum level of maturity. That means that images must be spoilered, tagged, and be appropriate for the context in which they appear. Text should also be tagged and appropriate for the context in which it appears.

E.g. adults covered by a sheet are obviously engaging in sexual activity; frank depictions of nudity; sexual innuendo; a person is shot and falls to the ground in a pool of blood or is hit by a car; etc.

Content which has mature themes and which might be available in restricted distribution - for example, the Kushiel’s Legacy series of books, or Game of Thrones episodes on HBO (where sex and violence are explicit, but still form part of a larger body of work) - you cannot post images, and you must tag text content (with the Mature prefix for stories and quests that contain it), but, if handled in a mature and appropriate way, it will be acceptable on Sufficient Velocity.

E.g. Explicit depictions of adult sexual activity, rape, dismemberment, or other severe physical injury.

Content which has mature themes and which would generally be considered pornographic, outrageously explicit, or offensive - for example, actual pornography; Bible Black; Saw, Human Centipede, etc. - (where sex and/or violence are explicit and form the purpose or a significant portion of the work) is not acceptable on Sufficient Velocity, and may, depending on the circumstances, fall afoul of the Terms of Service prohibition against obscene content.

This is not a set of firm lines. Between the extremes of “always acceptable” and “never acceptable” is a gradation, in which we ask you to be considerate of your fellow posters. Mature content should be treated in a respectful way and appropriately tagged if it is likely to offend or upset a reader who stumbles across it.

 

[Cetashwayo]

How Things Work

A guide for user interactions with the forum that go beyond “these are the rules and how you should follow them”.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Sanctions

The Moderation staff’s primary role is to bring to fruition our vision of Sufficient Velocity. For that purpose, we’ve given them a kit of tools to manage user behavior - everything from the power to use special, extra-noticeable textboxes in posts to the ability to ban users from the forum entirely.

One of the most powerful tools is the infraction system. This allows Moderators to notify users of rules-violating behavior while placing a note on their profile so that problem users can be tracked and identified.

Infractions & Warnings

Staff may post general warnings. These are marked posts in-thread that indicate the behavior of a user, or a group of users, is trending in an unacceptable fashion. Failure to follow a general warning may lead to a more severe response later.

Staff may issue Staff Notices. These are warnings to a specific user, logged on that user’s profile, indicating that the Staff believe the user’s behavior is sufficiently concerning to warrant official notice.

Staff may issue an Infraction. An infraction is an official notice that a user has violated the Rules. These are logged on the user’s profile, and will appear as a small banner attached to the infringing post. They also add “infraction points”. When a user has reached a certain number of infraction points, they are automatically suspended for a short period. Infraction points expire over time as they ‘age out’.
Threadbans and Specific Sanctions

Staff may also issue Threadbans. These prohibit a user from posting in a particular forum, either for a period of time or indefinitely. These are used when the Staff believes that - either because of repeated rules violations, an expectation that a user will not be able to follow the rules, or a need to manage a thread - a user needs to be prevented from posting in a thread. These are also logged to a user’s profile.

Staff may also issue a variety of other sanctions. These range from official ‘plea bargains’ - such as telling a user that they will be allowed to continue to participate in a thread on the understanding that if they cause a problem again, they will be permanently removed - to bans from a specific subforum or to bans from the forum as a whole. An administrator needs to sign off on a unique sanction being applied to a user.

When a user receives 200 points, they trigger an administrative review. This is an automatic, private process where the Staff decide if some specific response is required.

Automatic, Manual, and Indefinite Suspensions

When a user is no longer allowed to post on Sufficient Velocity, they are ‘suspended’, or ‘banned’. These bans range from one day to an indefinite period - a ban that will not be lifted until manually reviewed.

Users are automatically suspended at certain infraction point thresholds. When a user accumulates a certain number of ‘active’ infraction points, they will be automatically suspended for a period ranging from one day to three weeks, depending on the threshold. Specifically:

Points​	Suspension Length​
50​	1 day​
75​	3 days​
100​	7 days​
125​	7 days​
150​	14 days​
175​	14 days​
200​	21 days​
Every 25 points above 200​	21 days​

Users can also be suspended by staff manually. There are generally three kinds of manual suspension:

• A temporary suspension imposed while Staff review a course of action;
• A suspension imposed for a specific period as part of a specific sanction;
• A suspension imposed for an indefinite period because a user has demonstrated that they cannot participate on Sufficient Velocity.

Users can view the length of their suspensions on the Infraction Actions tab of the user profile. Generally, when a user is suspended, they are still able to log in, view the forum, use personal messaging, and appeal. If these features are abused, however, users may find them restricted or removed.

Administrative Reviews

With tens of thousands of users, it’s impossible for the Staff to know everyone on Sufficient Velocity and keep track of their behavior. The purpose of the infraction system is primarily recordkeeping, and not behavioral modification.

There are a number of circumstances where a user’s behavior comes to the attention of the Staff for a specific reason. That might be because the user’s name has appeared in reports repeatedly, or it might be because:

• A post is an egregious violation of the rules.
• A series of posts is repeatedly questionable.
• The user is a member of the Staff, or the Council.
• The user has received enough infraction points recently that they have 200 ‘active’ points.

When a user comes to our attention like this, they’ll be referred for an administrative review. Depending on the circumstances, this process may be more or less formal, and can involve both moderators and administrators.

This review considers all elements of the user’s behavior - the behavior itself, the user’s position (if any), mitigating or complicating circumstances (if any), and so on. At the end of the review, an administrator will decide on a response.

That response can be anything from nothing, up through a private warning, to a regular infraction, a short-term ban, a long-term ban, a public warning - all the way up to a permanent suspension.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Appeals

Unlike on many forums, if you believe the Staff have acted in error on Sufficient Velocity, you have recourse.

Nearly every Staff action on Sufficient Velocity may be appealed through our robust appeals system. Every action of the Staff in implementing the rules can be appealed: an infraction, a thread ban, and a suspension. You cannot appeal a policy decision - like “this should not be against the rules” - or a decision of the Directors in implementing the Terms of Service. This applies to actions taken on Sufficient Velocity proper; associated systems, for example a Discord channel, may have different policies.

You can appeal by making an appeal in the “Make an Appeal” forum, which is a subforum of the Administrative Tribunal. This thread will only be visible to you, an Advocate if you have one, and the Staff.

Using an Advocate
A number of users have volunteered to assist with appeals. A list can be found here. These advocates exist to help both users and the Staff in resolving appeals in a speedy and fair way.

Users who need assistance can request an Advocate by sending one of them a personal message. Please include the details of the actions you want to appeal, and why.

Remember that Advocates are not lawyers. They are not obligated to take appeals, and their job is not to provide you with the most zealous defense possible so that you can win at any cost.

You may simply consult with an Advocate for assistance, or you may ask an Advocate to write your appeal for you. In either case, if an advocate decides to assist you, they will be added as a collaborator to your appeal so that they can participate.

Keep in mind that Advocates are users too, with lives outside of Sufficient Velocity. If you need an extension to consult an Advocate, you should request one well before the deadline to file an appeal.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Making Appeals and the Four Corners Rule

For the sake both of reaching a fair and transparent results, and the Arbitrator who will be evaluating your appeal, we have a number of restrictions on how appeals are made.

First, appeals must be made within three days of the action you are appealing. The Staff may grant extensions - before the three day period expires - at their discretion.

Second, there is a soft cap on appeals at 1,000 words. If your appeal is longer than 1,000 words, the Arbitrator may ask you to shorten it, may tell you to obtain the assistance of an advocate, or may dismiss it, depending on the circumstances.

Third, every appeal must satisfy the Four Corners Rule. That means that the Arbitrator does not have to go outside the ‘four corners’ of your appeal to resolve it: all of the information is present, and clearly presented, in the appeal itself.

Specifically:

• Your appeal must include, in its title, the name of the thread in which the staff action you are appealing occurred (or if there is no thread, what the action was);
• Your appeal must include a brief summary of the facts, including the details of the staff action - which moderator, what action was taken, and any warning text;
• Your appeal must include a copy of the content which resulted in the staff action, with a link to it;
• Your appeal must include a summary of the context of your post.
• Your appeal must include a copy of the rule under which the action was taken;
• Your appeal must include a clear statement of argument - why, exactly, you believe the staff action was wrong.

It is up to you to make an appeal in proper form. It is not the Arbitrator’s job to gather information about your appeal or try to figure out what you meant to say. An arbitrator will dismiss your appeal - that is, reject it without looking at its merits - if:

• It is out of time;
• It does not satisfy the Four Corners Rule;
• It relies on facts which do not go to the question of moderator error;
• It argues that some behavior should not be against the rules, or that a rule should not exist;
• It argues that there was some staff misconduct, unless there is clear evidence of misconduct presented and that misconduct is relevant to the action being appealed;
• It clearly and obviously will not succeed.

An Arbitrator may dismiss your appeal and, at the same time, give you permission to fix the problems with it (they are not required to do so). If they do so, you will have the remainder of the three-day appeals window (after subtracting the time taken to file the original appeal) to fix your appeal.

Special Appeals​

While you can appeal nearly every decision of a Moderator, there are three general exceptions.

First, you cannot appeal a decision of the Directors as it relates to the Terms of Service. If you have a complaint, you may request that the Directors review their decision by messaging them privately.

Second, you cannot appeal a decision of an Arbitrator to dismiss your appeal to another Arbitrator, or the Council. You may ask an administrator to review the decision of the Arbitrator by tagging them in the appeal thread. Decisions of an Administrator about the dismissal of an appeal cannot be appealed further.

Third, you cannot appeal a decision of the Operations staff with respect to technical decisions or evaluations (particularly, their decision about whether an account is a sockpuppet). If you have a complaint, you may request that a decision of the Operations staff be reviewed by messaging an Administrator or Director privately.

Arbitrator Decisions​

When evaluating an appeal, an Arbitrator is reviewing the original infraction. If they believe the moderator was in error, they can take any step that the original moderator could have taken. That means they can:

• Decide the original Moderator decision was correct, and let it stay;
• Decide the original Moderator decision was correct, but used the wrong rule, and simply change the rule;
• Decide the original Moderator decision was wrong and that the appropriate response was more severe and increase it;
• Decide the original Moderator decision was wrong and that the appropriate response was less severe, and reduce it.

If an Arbitrator has not handled your appeal within three days of you making it, feel free to bump the thread and tag either the Arbitrator assigned, or the Arbitration Group Leader, or one of the administrative staff.

Administrators should rule on appeals within seven days. If this has not happened, please tag the Arbitration Group Leader and one of the administrative staff.

Appeals are not a debate. If you believe that an Arbitrator did not consider a relevant fact, you can raise that issue with them, and an Arbitrator has the power to review their decision and change it if they agree that the fact was relevant and material. If you believe however that an Arbitrator wrongly decided your case, you must appeal. Arbitrators will not argue back, will not change their opinion because you started an argument, and you may be infracted under Rule 5.

Arbitrator decisions are considered private. Arbitrators, Staff, and Council will not discuss the details publicly unless a good reason exists for doing so and an Administrator agrees.

Appealing Arbitrator Decisions

A decision on the merits by an Arbitrator may also be appealed. Appeals from an Arbitrator’s decision go to the Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal is composed of the twelve elected Community Councillors, who represent the users, and an Administrator.

If you wish to appeal an Arbitrator’s decision, you must request an appeal to the Tribunal within three days of that decision being made. This request must clearly set out, in no more than 1,000 words,

• Why the Arbitrator’s decision was wrong;
• What you believe is the appropriate response.
• You must also indicate if, for some reason, you do not believe the decision should be made public.

For regular appeals, the Tribunal has the power to set its own caseload. When you request an appeal to the Tribunal, the Councillors vote on whether or not they believe the case should be heard. Four “yes” votes (within seven days) are required for the case to go to Tribunal.

If a request to appeal does not recieve four “yes” votes within seven days from the Council, the Arbitrator’s decision is automatically upheld. If the Council does not vote to take the case, individual councillors may, after the close of voting, provide an explanation as to why they thought your case should (or should not) have been heard.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Automatic Tribunals

Certain appeals must be heard by the Tribunal. They fall, generally, into two categories.

First, an Administrator may send an appeal to the Tribunal, if they feel that the appeal is of sufficient public importance to warrant the Council’s review. Administrators may send an appeal to the Tribunal at any time - before it is heard by an Arbitrator, after an Arbitrator has decided, or after the Council has refused to hear a case.

Second, any time an indefinite suspension is handed down under the Rules, the administrator who imposes it must automatically file an appeal directly with the Tribunal for review.

The Tribunal Process

During a Tribunal, councillors are neither judges nor a jury. They are a “court” in the traditional sense: a group of individuals whose purpose is to bring their diverse skills and opinions to bear in giving advice. Councillors have an opportunity to discuss the case, review the evidence and allegations, ask questions of the Staff and appellant, and think about the effect on other cases of interpreting the rules in a specific way before making a recommendation to the Administrators of Sufficient Velocity as to how the appeal should be resolved. Councilors have broad freedom in their recommendations, including being able to recommend that a punishment is increased from the initial appeal, if they have a suitable argument for it.

Each Tribunal runs for seven days. This seven day period runs from the date that the fourth councillor votes to hear the appeal; the Council may at that time immediately begin discussing the case. This time period may be extended for complex cases at the discretion of the administrator. When time has expired, the Administrator will, after having considered the Council’s discussions and advice, give a final decision on the case.

During a Tribunal, appellants are not entitled to actively participate. They may answer questions directly asked of them and they may make a single statement in reply, but only if it is approved by the Administrator responsible for the Tribunal.

The Council is not expected to give a unified recommendation. Different Councillors may disagree on what should be done. However, each Councillor (or group of Councillors), should consider:

• Whether the appeal should be made public (by balancing the public interest in transparency with the personal privacy interests of those involved);
• Whether the rule or staff policy involved was sufficiently clear, and if not, how it should be clarified;
• Whether the rule or staff policy involved is appropriate, and if not, what change should be made;
• Whether the Staff member was wrong in their decision, and if so, why;
• If the Staff member was wrong, what the appropriate response to the behavior that was sanctioned is, if any.

After the seven days have passed, the Administrator will then make a decision about these concerns, issue a final statement, and, unless a compelling interest motivates privacy, make the Tribunal public.

 

[Cetashwayo]

The Community Council

The Community Council represents the users of Sufficient Velocity. Twelve users are elected to serve one year terms during which they participate in the policy-making process, get a chance to oversee and work with the Staff, and provide their opinions on the resolution of user appeals.

Councillors are elected to one year terms in an election period that runs through the month of August. Users have an opportunity to nominate two candidates to the Council. The twenty-four users who receive the most nominations stand for election in an approval voting system (i.e., users can vote for as many, or as few, candidates as they like), and the twelve candidates with the most votes take their seats on September 1 of each year.

In order to encourage churn and prevent Councillors from getting too comfortable, Councillors may not sit for more than two terms in a row (though there is no limit to the number of times they may be elected). Current staff members cannot be nominated.

If a Councillor is removed from office (or quits, or is deemed to have quit by virtue of inactivity) in the first three months of the term, the candidate who received the next number of votes will be offered the seat. If a candidate leaves office more than three months but less than nine months into the term, another election will be held. If a candidate leaves office more than nine months into the term, the seat will remain vacant for the balance of the term.

The Directors may, from time to time, appoint up to three additional Councillors, if they believe that a demographic of the userbase is underserved. They serve out the balance of the current Council term in which they were appointed, and then must be appointed (or elected in the usual fashion).

Councillors have a key role in our system: they act as the voice and the eyes of the users of Sufficient Velocity.

Councillors have a range of duties:

• They give their advice on appeals through the Tribunal process;
• They review policy decisions proposed by the Staff, and propose their own policies;
• They hear complaints or concerns from users and communicate those issues to the Staff;
• They have the ability to view the report log, and provide comments on nonpublic moderator actions and report handling.

Councillors, like Advocates, are subject to the same policies as the Staff regarding misconduct, conduct off Sufficient Velocity, and confidentiality.

Advocates

Advocates are volunteers whose primary purpose is to assist with the speedy, fair, and transparent resolution of appeals.

Advocates are not lawyers. While they can assist users with appeals, they are not chosen for their ability to zealously represent their ‘clients’. Their first interest is to the community and to resolving an appeal in a way that is fair to everyone involved and reaches a just result.

Any user who wishes to become an Advocate should apply through the Ask a Private Question forum. Advocates should be members of good standing, willing to assist the community, and capable of coherent, concise, clear, and mindful discussion. In their application, an Advocate should select one or two appeals presented to the Tribunal and produce a short statement which demonstrates that they could have meaningfully contributed to the resolution of the appeal, as described above.

Advocates:

• Provide advice to users in need of help in formulating their arguments against a staff action
• In some cases, write the entirety of the user’s appeal if needed
• Inform users honestly when they are unlikely to succeed in any staff action review
• Serve as an example to the community not only for their effort in appeals but for their hard and selfless work on behalf of users generally.

Advocates, like Councillors, are subject to the same policies as the Staff regarding misconduct, conduct off Sufficient Velocity, and confidentiality.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Staff Policies

These policies are primarily guidance for Moderators and Arbitrators in how to carry out their duties and what Staff best practices are. This codification sets out generally what is considered good practice, what the Staff’s interpretation of the rules are, and what is taken into account when making a decision to moderate or not moderate and on hearing an appeal.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Issuing Infractions

When you press the “Infract” button on a post or other content, you will see four tabs in the Infraction menu.

On the Infraction Information tab, first select the infraction category. The two primary categories you will use will be “Custom Warnings” and “Staff Notices”. The others are self-explanatory, but should be signed off on by an administrator. The exception is the “Temporary Suspension - Variable Length” category, which you should use if you need to immediately ban a user pending review - say for possible violations of the Terms of Service.

With the “Custom Warning” Infraction type selected, write a brief - ≤140 character - summary of the infraction in the small text box immediately below the category menu.

Next, select the number of points and expiration period. 25 points are the standard, and appropriate in nearly every case. This number can be raised if the behavior is spectacularly egregious, a repeat behavior, or if an in-thread warning has been issued and ignored. The points expiry category should be left as default.

Fill in the “notes” field with a 3-5 sentence explanation of what rule you believe was violated, and why. If you have issued more or less than 25 points, that should also be explained. This will be filed with the report and the infraction for later reference, but will not be shown to the user.

On the Member Notification tab, you can choose to issue a warning PM, or require a user acknowledge the warning, or both. User acknowledgement is the default, and is required. The default text is fairly basic. It is always recommended to provide a more specific explanation of why the infraction was levied.

On the Content Action tab, you have three choices: do nothing, soft-delete the content (and provide a deletion explanation), or post a public warning (and provide the warning text). You should always post a public warning and provide a short explanation of what specifically was against the rules. This will be displayed on top of the post that the warning is being issued for.

On the final tab, you can review the user’s infraction history and confirm the infraction. Do not forget to press “Infract Member” on this tab - it is easy enough to think you have already reached the confirmation page and navigate away without confirming the infraction!

When you have made the infraction, you may wish to make a post in the thread noting that you have done so and providing a more fulsome explanation. This is not necessary in all cases. In some cases - especially in fast-moving threads - you may find it to actually be more disruptive. In others - where a moderator warning will be helpful in preventing a recurrence of the behavior - it may be extremely valuable. You should consider the following factors in deciding whether to make a moderator post about the infraction:

• Is a moderator post likely to further disrupt the thread?
• Is a moderator post likely to encourage users in the thread to avoid the behavior in the future?
• Is the behavior that was infracted one that requires an explanation as to why it was wrong?
• Is the behavior that was infracted one that is sufficiently severe to require an explicit public denunciation by the staff?

 

[Cetashwayo]

Report Queues

In the past, there was a single report queue: all reports made by users were dumped into a single queue. That is no longer the case. Now we have a variety of report queues, along with some automatic report handling, and you should understand how and why those queues are to be used.

The Reports Queue is still the default queue. The vast majority of things reported by a user will be dumped into this queue, to be handled by the moderation team. This queue is viewable by the Council.

The Appeals Queue is for all appeals. When a user makes a thread in the “Make an Appeal” forum, a report is automatically generated and dumped into the Appeals queue. The Arbitration group leader will then be able to assign those appeals to arbitrators for resolution. This queue is viewable by the Council.

The Q&A Queue is for questions in the “Ask a Private Question” forum. When a user makes a thread in that forum, a report is automatically generated and dumped into this queue for assignment. The Moderation group leader or an administrator will then be able to assign those questions for resolution. This queue is not viewable by the Council.

The Admin Queue is for reports that can only be handled by Administrators or the Directors. This queue contains specific questions that need to be answered by the Directors (such as policy on commercial use), applications to the staff (to be answered by group leaders), Terms of Service violations, and reports assigning tribunals to an Administrator. This queue is not viewable by the Council.

The Ads Queue is for internal advertisement submissions. When a user submits an advertisement, a report is automatically generated and dumped into this queue for assignment. The administrative team will then be able to assign and resolve these issues. This queue is not viewable by the Council.

The Operations Queue involves anything related to forum operations. Sockpuppet reports, technical issues, and other problems that involve the forum software or forum maintenance belong in this queue and are handled by the Operators. This queue is not viewable by the Council.

The Contact Us Queue is for users who use the “contact us” form. When a user uses the contact us form, a report is automatically generated and dumped into this queue for response. The administrative team will then be able to assign and resolve these issues. This queue is not viewable by the Council.

Staff should feel free to move reports from one queue to another as is appropriate. If something shows up in the default reports queue that is a technical problem, it should be pushed over to Operations. Staff should not be afraid to move reports around; don’t abuse the function, but any move can be easily undone. If you are unsure whether something belongs in a queue, you can always ask another member of the staff for their opinion.

Resolving Reports

When you have finished evaluating a report assigned to you, you will need to resolve it. On the right side of the report window, you will see a box titled “Handle Report”, with four radiobuttons, a checkbox, and a text entry field.

You have two choices to close a report. The first is “Resolve” report. Use “Resolve” when you have taken some action as a result of the report - whether that is issuing an infraction or an in-thread warning. Use “Reject” when you have taken no action as a result of the report.

The checkbox immediately below allows you to send a note, by way of alert, to the user who filed a report. If more than one user has filed a report, the note will be sent to all of them. You should always provide a short (≤140 char) note about the resolution of the report. Do not provide details about any infractions that may have been issued, but a note along the vein of “Thank you, but we have decided no rules are broken” or “Thank you, I’ve dropped a warning in the thread” will go a long way to reassuring users that their complaints are heard.

You also have an opportunity to enter a comment in the textbox labelled “Comment”. This note will not be shown to users, but will go into the report for staff recordkeeping. If you have levied an infraction, you can leave it blank (because the infraction itself will go into the report) but if you are issuing an in-thread warning or have decided no rules were broken, it’s good practice to note that in the closing comment.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Managing Tribunals

Each Tribunal includes all active Councillors and an Administrator. Your job as the Administrator is to act as a combination of judge and investigator. You have the power to gather evidence and Staff statements and provide them to the Council, to manage the behavior of Councillors and appellants during the Tribunal itself, to guide the Council’s discussion, and to finally make a statement and determination about the appeal.

You are expected to take a broader view of the case than a moderator or arbitrator. Not only are you not representing the staff against the appellant, but you are also not constrained to a simple mechanical application of the rules.

Your role is to represent the interests of Sufficient Velocity itself: its goals and principles, in the form of transparency, fairness, and its vision and mission statements; the expectation of its users, in the form of an equal and reasonable application of its rules and policies; and the concerns of the organization organization, which are shaped by what is practical, efficient, and achievable in the real world with the resources we have at our disposal.

You may ask questions both of Council and of the appellants for the purposes of clarifying the issues and making sure that all necessary facts and policies are canvassed, and, if required, provide information yourself for the purposes of ensuring transparency about Staff decision-making.

You should not infract Councillors for their behavior in Tribunals. If a post is unacceptable, off-topic, or otherwise problematic, delete it and personally inform the Councillor as to why you did so, encouraging them to bring forward a post that is not problematic.

At the conclusion of a Tribunal, your first decision should be whether or not the Tribunal deliberations should be made public, and your second is what conclusion you should draw.

The policy is that all Tribunal deliberations are made public where the appellant participates. If the appellant chooses not to participate - either because this is a permanent suspension or because this was a Staff appeal - an appeal is not made public. However, there are any number of factors which might influence your decision away from this default. If allegations are made of misconduct by a Staff member or other posters which are not borne out, if personally embarrassing information or personal details are communicated, or if the material itself is against the rules, consider making the Tribunal private and instead making public a short summary of your conclusion, instead. Be careful about redacting posts in the Tribunal. The optics of doing so are very poor, regardless of the reason.

Depending on the nature of the Tribunal, the final statement in a Tribunal can be very simple or very complicated - and much of it turns on the Council’s recommendation.

If the Council is agreed on a recommendation, you are also agreed with that recommendation, and there are no major policy concerns, your task will be straightforward. Summarize that recommendation and state the disposition, and then carry it out.

If the Council is agreed on a recommendation and it does have major policy implications, you will need to consult with the Administrators and/or Directors, depending on what the policy is. If the policy covers issues reserved to the Directors, you will obviously not be able to accept that recommendation on your own. In such cases, you should consult with the Administrators and Directors before making your decision. If you agree with the Council’s recommendation and there is no opposition, you should accept that recommendation. If there is opposition, you cannot independently set board policy, and should narrow the scope of your decision so that it does not impact policy concerns. You may, however, recommend to the Administrators and Directors that they take a certain action.

If the Council is not agreed on a recommendation, you will need to review the Council’s separate positions. You may also query various members of the Staff on their own opinions. You will then need to make a decision, and provide a specific explanation of your reasoning as to why you took that decision. If there are major policy implications, you will again, need to consult with the Administrators and/or Directors, and cannot make policy decisions on your own.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Application of The Rules

The Rules apply to everything that is posted on Sufficient Velocity, no matter where it is posted (public threads, private threads, personal messages, profile posts, etc.).

The rules do not apply to things posted on other websites, even if the person who posted them is identifiable as a SV user.

Things posted on other websites may be used as evidence of malicious intent or bad faith when deciding whether or not something posted on SV violates the rules and if so, what sanction is appropriate.

The Role of Authors/Thread Creators

When a thread is started, the person who starts a thread - the “OP”, or “original poster” - gets to decide what that thread should be about and generally how it should proceed. This is true regardless of whether or not what is posted is a discussion thread or a creative writing thread or a questing thread.

When a thread is being moderated, Staff should keep in mind this original intent. They may also want to ask the OP for advice if the thread is lengthy and complex or if the issue involves the OP trying to manage behavior in the thread.

Staff are not obligated to take the advice of the OP. Staff are enforcing the rules of the site, not the OP’s rules. For example, if an OP dedicates a thread to productive discussion about goldfish, the Staff may want to solicit the OP’s thoughts on whether or not betta fish fall within the scope of this discussion. They will not, however, ban someone because the OP does not like their opinions on what colors of goldfish are best.

Using Multiple Accounts on SV

Users are not allowed to have more than one account at a time without explicit prior staff permission. Sufficient Velocity is not anonymous; it is pseudonymous. Much of the value of the forum is users building up a reputation, and that is lost with multiple accounts.

Administrative staff may grant permission for multiple accounts, for good reason. If the reason is because the user wants to get away from a prior ‘bad reputation’, the administrator should be convinced that the user will actually change their behavior before authorizing the second account, and it should be made clear to the user that they are not to continue using their old account.

If a user is suspected of having more than one unauthorized account, the report should be assigned to a member of the Operations staff for further investigation.

Normally, if the Operations staff are convinced that a user has multiple accounts, they will merge the accounts and attach an infraction to the primary account. If the accounts are being used for some disruptive purpose - such as to pad votes - this will normally trigger another, separate infraction.

The details of Operations investigations are private, often involving IP addresses. Appeals from the decision of the Operations staff are technical matters and are reserved to the Directors.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Advertising & Commercial Use

Users are not generally allowed to post commercial messages. This includes advertising a product or service, asking for donations for a cause, asking that money be donated to a third party, or promoting a product or service. This applies not only to the posting of threads, but also to posts within threads, and signature blocks or avatars.

There are several exceptions:

1. Posting news about new [relevant] products or services, like books, movies, video games, and so on, as long as they constitute a general source of discussion and the poster has no personal economic interest, is entirely acceptable.
2. The internal advertising system, obviously, is not subject to this policy.
3. If a user in good standing - someone with a history of participating in the community - has a personal interest in a certain product or service, and that product or service is relevant, they may advertise it in a thread devoted to talking about that thing (if one exists) or in a new thread they create. They may not make multiple threads, or make many posts in an attempt to repeatedly ‘bump’ the thread. Their interest should be disclosed.

 

[Cetashwayo]

SV Does Not Provide Professional Advice

SV has many users who are professionals: lawyers, doctors, dentists, wrestlers. Nearly every professional regulatory body which governs the practice of a field (lawyers, doctors, engineers, the WWE excepted) prevents their members from giving advice over the internet or without a proper level of client intake.

The distinction between “professional advice” and “educated discussion” is whether or not the advice sought is specific to the circumstances of a particular user. For example, if a user is pulled over for driving over the speed limit and asks how they should negotiate the ticket, that is professional legal advice. If a user asks about what evidence is usually required to prove murder or what the symptoms of cancer are, however, this is usually just ‘educated discussion’ and acceptable.

This does not necessarily apply to fields where the practice is generally unregulated, like software development or blacksmithing. In those cases, we expect our users to be responsible with their advice.

Threads that seek professional advice should be locked and the user should be informed that professional advice needs to be sought from a local specialist.

Suicide Threats and Ideation

On rare occasions, a post or personal message indicates that a user is contemplating suicide.

Staff are not counselors or trauma specialists, and are not trained to respond to these messages. Threads should be immediately escalated to a Director, who may be able to obtain personal information about the user and report it to local authorities.

Users should be directed to the resources below, and posts (or threads as the circumstances warrant) soft-deleted. Staff and users are not trained to engage with suicidal individuals and should not attempt to do so.

Users can be directed to the following resources:
https://www.imalive.org/ (Online crisis network)
1-800-273 TALK [8255] (US National Suicide Prevention Lifeline)
https://www.iasp.info/resources/Crisis_Centres/ (list of global crisis center resources)

 

[Cetashwayo]

Human Resources

SV is well-served by a large contingent of volunteers. While strictly speaking they are not necessary for the site to function, it could not function anywhere near as well as it does without their tireless efforts. They range from Councillors elected by the users to Advocates who volunteer to assist users with appeals to our volunteer moderators and administrative staff.

Staff Selection

Sufficient Velocity welcomes new Staff volunteers. Users who are interested can open a thread in the Ask A Private Question forum, where they can engage in a dialogue with the appropriate departmental Group Leader and the administrators of the site.

If you would like to volunteer, you should make it clear what position you would like to volunteer for, any relevant skills you might have, and why you would be a good fit - both with respect to SV’s institutional culture and with respect to your particular skills.

This is not an interview, per se. Group Leaders will inevitably flip through your infraction history and your posts; they will get a good idea of your public personality. What you should be trying to convey is why you would be a good fit and what you can contribute.

Ultimately, Group Leaders are the ones who accept volunteers for their departments, with the concurrence of the administrative team.

For Moderators, the staff is looking for users who are:

• Capable of making quick decisions independently and decisively
• Respectful in their dealings with other users
• Able to think clearly and carefully without moving too rashly
• Able to defend their decisions firmly when questioned
• Responsible and serious in an official capacity

For Arbitrators, the staff is looking for users who are:

• Able to make clear and cogent arguments, and defend them
• Levelheaded and calm even during heated debate
• Respectful in their dealings with other users
• Able to think critically and honestly when making decisions
• Responsible and serious in an official capacity

For Operators, the staff is looking for users who are:

• Diligent and willing to commit man-hours to forum maintenance
• Fluent in, or at least understanding of PHP, CSS, Javascript, or HTML
• Careful when using forum software, especially when implementing new features
• Aware of the considerable power the Operator position has over vital forum components
• And the potential consequences of mishandling or misusing that power
• Transparent and communicative to other Operators and staff when making alterations to the forum

Staff Training

As anyone who’s spent a good amount of time on Sufficient Velocity knows, we have a plethora of rules and policies. Some of these are public and broadly available to the users, but some are not.

For Moderators, upon acceptance you’ll be paired with an experienced moderator. For the first two weeks, you’ll just follow them around, ask questions, and participate in discussions, while not actioning anything. For four weeks after that, you’ll be able to action reports, but only after checking with your mentor first. After that six week period concludes, you’ll have a chat with the Group Leader, who will decide whether you’re ready to be thrown to the wolves or whether you need more supervision.

For Arbitrators, the policy is similar. You’ll be paired with an experienced arbitrator, who will go over a few past decisions with you and discuss some current appeals so you understand the process. You’ll then be allowed to conduct four appeals, tag-teaming with your mentor, before sitting down with the Group Leader.

For Operators, the policy depends very heavily on what particularly you’re interested in doing. Xon or another experienced member of the operations team will make sure you’re set up with the credentials you need and you’re familiar with the system, and when your mentor is comfortable letting you work independently, you’ll be able to do that.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Staff Confidentiality

Staff are granted considerable power and leeway when it comes to managing Sufficient Velocity. Because you are all volunteers, that means we have imbued you with a particular level of trust.

Part of that trust is understanding that certain parts of the job involve private information which needs to be kept private.

First is user-related information. Reports and the staff discussions about them sometimes involve discussion of IP addresses, email addresses, or the content of private messages, as well as - almost by necessity - some of the embarrassing things that users have said or done around the forum and which may have been deleted or be made private, like appeals.

Second is the content of staff discussion. In order to encourage policy and process debates, as well as free, fair, and frank discussion, Staff discussions - whether in reports, in staff-affiliated instant messaging channels, or in the private forums - are private and closed. While you are free to discuss your own position on policies or processes, you are not free to reveal what other members of the Staff have said.

Summarizing the content of a report thread or staff discussion when the underlying action is already being publicly discussed may be acceptable, if the specific individuals involved are not personally identifiable, the matter is not sensitive, and the summary is sufficiently general.

For example, in the course of discussing a policy that has just been implemented, it is fair to say, “I was opposed to this course of action, but many staff were in favor of it.” Or one might say, “This post was reported by a number of people, and I agree with those who said it was deeply offensive”.

On the other hand, it is not acceptable to discuss a policy which has not been implemented, or a report which requires privacy. It is not acceptable to say, “Someone suggested that we delete all tags”, or “someone suggested that we ban all quests with protagonists under the age of 15”. Whether or not these statements are accurate is beside the point: they are not official policy and they were raised in the context of a private discussion.

Finally, from time to time, for various reasons, it may be that this information should be disclosed - to the Council, to law enforcement or regulators, or to the public. This is a decision the administrative team and the Directors will make.

Deliberately revealing this private information is a significant breach of trust. It will result in a permanent removal from the Staff and may result in a permanent removal from Sufficient Velocity.

Staff Conduct Off Sufficient Velocity

We are aware that we are a target for discussion, praise, and occasionally ridicule, on other websites. We are also aware that some former users are somewhat obsessed with us and so follow our various announcements just to complain about them.

Our official position is that this is no concern of ours. What other people choose to do on other websites is their business. Statements elsewhere have no official standing and do not constitute policy of any sort on Sufficient Velocity.

That being said, we understand that individuals may not feel the same way, and may take the discussion elsewhere. We strongly request that you do not engage elsewhere. It is often a waste of time and can occasionally cause confusion, especially if users believe you are speaking officially on matters of policy.

SV does not require that its Staff behave in any particular way outside of SV. Be aware, however, that what you say - especially if you identify yourself as a staff member from Sufficient Velocity - reflects on us. If your behavior elsewhere directly affects Sufficient Velocity, you may be subject to an administrative review, and ultimately removed from the Staff.

Official Communications Channels

Besides the forum itself, Staff have a number of official channels for communication - including a private staff forum, Discord and IRC. Participation in the latter two is not mandatory, but it is encouraged.

In addition, the Council has a similar set of discussion channels. Staff may be invited to participate in these discussions, as well, at the discretion of the Council.

These are relatively informal venues and not subject to strict codes of practice or behaviour, though there is the normal expectation that everyone be polite and constructive. However, as they are official affiliates of SV and intended to assist in its daily operations, we expect people to adhere to reasonable directions from administrators.

Misconduct and Administrative Review

We’re all human. Everyone both makes mistakes and says things they don’t mean. Unfortunately, when you’re in a position of public prominence, that can be both embarrassing and reflect poorly on both us and you.

Staff are subject to a wider range of “misconduct” than regular users. This includes not only possibly violating the rules, but also violating any of the specific obligations of those groups - such as confidentiality - as well as failing to carry out their duties, carrying out their duties improperly, and so on and so forth.

These users are not subject to the normal infraction and automatic suspension regime, per se. Instead, every incident of misconduct is automatically referred to an administrative review.

This review may conclude by levelling the same sanction a normal users would receive, but it also has a wider variety of possible responses, including removing a user from their position.

The decision of any misconduct review will be signed off on by a more senior staff member than the staff member in question - so for a Moderator, by a Group Leader or administrator; an administrator by a Director; and a director by another director.

 

[Cetashwayo]

Staff Roles

To serve as a point of reference for new staff and users.

Directors

Directors are the representatives of Perihelion Media Works Ltd. on Sufficient Velocity. They carry out corporate objectives and unlike the staff generally, the Directors represent the Corporation and have the authority to speak officially on its behalf. They oversee the operations of the site, its staff, and its volunteers; they make policy decisions for how the site will be run and what is acceptable; and they provide administrative, technical, business, and legal support.

Specifically, the Directors:

• Sign off on all Administrator candidates and review all volunteers generally;
• Decide on a policy and business direction for the site;
• Ensure technical functionality;
• Administer the Terms of Service.

Directors are not ‘volunteers’ and are not recruited.

Administrators

Administrators are the managerial and policy staff of Sufficient Velocity. Administrators are the most senior volunteers on Sufficient Velocity. Generally, they oversee human resources, policy development and implementation, and sign off on certain moderation and arbitration actions. They also serve as the publicly-facing senior staff of SV, and deal with user complaints and questions.

Specifically with respect to human resources, administrators:

• Sign off on the choices of the Group Leaders to recruit for their departments;
• Review all infractions or allegations of misconduct against staff members and decide on a response;
• With group leaders, review staff activity on a regular basis and decide on staffing levels;
• With group leaders, ensure that all new staff are onboarded and trained appropriately;

Specifically with respect to policy development and implementation, administrators:

• Maintain the codification of SV’s rules, policies, and procedures;
• Run contests and special events;
• Review and analyze statistics, surveys, and other data to produce information about user behavior and preferences;
• Draft and sign off on changes to staff policy or rules.

Specifically, with respect to Moderation, administrators:

• Sign off on custom sanctions, including permanent suspensions;
• Sign off on custom thread or subforum policies;
• Sign off on any moderator activity that targets Moderators, Arbitrators, Operators, Administrators, or Councillors.

Specifically with respect to Arbitration, administrators:

• Provide direction through the entire appeals process about proper conduct;
• Resolve appeals from the decisions of an arbitrator to dismiss an appeal;
• Address all allegations of staff misconduct in an appeal;
• Sign off on any Staff decision to send an appeal to the Tribunal;
• Ensure Tribunals move smoothly and are completed in the appropriate timeframe;
• Resolve Tribunals and provide the conclusory staff statement and decision.

The administrative staff consists of the Administrator, a number of assistant administrators, and a number of ex-officio administrators. All Directors and Group Leaders are ex-officio administrators, and can exercise any of the powers of an administrator as the circumstances warrant.

Administrators are selected by the administrative staff, with the concurrence of the Directors. When selecting an administrator, we are looking for users who have a demonstrated track record on SV. They should be trustworthy, creative, and have experience with SV and how it runs. As a general rule, this means administrators will only be accepted from users who are (or have been) a member of Staff or a member of the Council. Only very rarely will an administrator be accepted directly from the general body of users.

Assistant group leaders of moderation, arbitration, and operations have all the authority of their group leaders on day-to-day matters of administration. However, when it comes to policy discussion they cannot substitute or overrule the opinions of their group leader, even when that group leader is absent at the time. That is to say, they can contribute to policy discussion, but they cannot speak for their group leader, who ultimately has final say on decisions within their authority.

Moderators

Moderators are the site’s enforcement arm, and their primary task is making sure everyone is following the rules. Moderators have the ability to issue infractions and warnings on users, and their primary goal is to make sure that everything is running smoothly. Even when no rules have been broken, moderators might intervene to prevent blowups between posters and to remind everyone to keep calm.

The primary tasks of Moderators are:

• To determine when and how users have crossed the line and broken the rules
• To issue warnings and infraction to users who have
• To communicate this to the user effectively through private message or in-thread statements
• To lock threads when it is deemed necessary, such as when discussion becomes too heated
• To edit thread titles when they are misleading or inflammatory
• To edit or delete posts to remove rulebreaking content
• To place a spoiler on posts that are not rulebreaking, but are also not scroll-safe
• Applying alternative sanctions like forum bans, the ability to post ratings, change your avatar and signature, or use the personal message system when appropriate

They are are also able to perform housekeeping tasks like moving threads on user request.

Moderators are recruited through the staff application system and are responsible to their group leader.

Arbitrators

Arbitrators are the site’s oversight arm. They review staff actions and ensure a “sober second thought” over the moderators. Their primary task is to review user appeals against their punishments and decide whether to overturn or uphold the previous decision. Arbitrators are not “higher up” than moderators; they simply have a different role. They cannot sanction moderators in their official duties, although they can recommend action to be taken against a moderator if they found their action to be absolutely out of the proper bounds.

The primary tasks of Arbitrators are:

• To hear Appeals from punished users and determine whether or not to change the punishment
• To provide clear and concise decisions in appeals, and to defend these decisions if the appeal is pushed to the Council
• If they have determined a change to the infraction is needed, to alter or remove the punishment from the user themselves

They are also able to perform housekeeping tasks like moving threads on user request.

Arbitrators are recruited through the staff application system and are responsible to their group leader.

Operators

Operators are the forum’s technical staff. Troubleshooting problems on the forum, developing new features and maintaining the different parts of the forum are their primary roles. Selected for their ability to understand and maintain the forum, operators have an essential if sometimes invisible function.

Their primary tasks are:

• Bugfixing problems across the board, such as formatting issues or technical glitches
• Improving and maintaining the site’s different visual themes
• Handling Multiple Account (“sockpuppeting”) cases
• Developing new forum features, such as Threadmarks and vote tallies
• Answering queries in the Technical Support Forum
• Spam-cleaning bots

They are also able to perform housekeeping tasks like moving threads on user request.

Operators are recruited through the staff application system and are responsible to their group leader.