So no players should be worried about having a situation that was already dealt with brought up again.

---

Leader of Vanguard Squad, Archipelago Liberation Forces

I have read and accept the FI2 Behavioral Conduct Policy.

Unless they perform the same behavior again, no. And even then, they won't be assumed to have already been escalated. But let's hope that case doesn't happen.



Edited 1 times. Last edit at 08/25/16 10:20PM

I understand the need to correct a policy when shortcomings occur, but to apply it retroactively is seriously concerning to me, both as a player and as a Titatanium Feather. It sets a dangerous precedent that policy changes will occur as unknown lines are crossed.

---

Rymaus Liena “Ellie” Dax

Respectfully, if this policy is going to be used to retroactively punish a member of our community for issues that were already settled under the old rules, please remove my name from the list of advocates.

I have read and accept the FI2 Behavioral Conduct Policy.

Amber R Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Respectfully, if this policy is going to be used
> to retroactively punish a member of our community
> for issues that were already settled under the old
> rules, please remove my name from the list of
> advocates.
>


Amber, thank you for speaking up about your discomfort and we absolutely respect your decision to not be an advocate. We are sorry to lose you, but understand that you might be uncomfortable and in no way want to pressure you into something you don't want to do. If you would like to talk about, I am available, but otherwise, thank you again for saying something.

I have read and accept the FI2 Behavioral Conduct Policy.

I very much want to support these rules going forward, which is what I was honored to sign on to do.

That said, I think it undermines trust in these rules to say they are insufficient to protect the game environment going forward, and therefore need to be retroactively applied. I think what has been written was adequate, and should have been trusted to either prohibit problem behavior, or to weed out any problems as they occur.

I sincerely wish this use of these policies, however singular, had been conveyed when I was approached to take on this role.

I have read this policy.

I don't know the details of the particular case we are referring to obliquely, but the prospect of retroactive discipline, especially when we have had conduct rules in place already for dealing with egregious behavior, makes me hesitant to sign on without more information, explanation, or assurances that this really is the only time we'll be doing this.

I've experienced retroactive condemnation of something I've done that seemed innocuous at the time, despite checking in along the way and getting approval beforehand. I've no hurry to repeat that experience here.

---

-Josh Marcus
Head of Plot, FI 3

David Rubenstein just asked the question on FB.

Cross posting it here as I was about to ask the same question.

David wrote:

"What sort of action could be so egregious that it needs to be retroactively punished under the new policy, rather than punishing under the policy that was in place when the event occurred. I understand you may not want to share specifics, and therefore don't want you to, but just to address it in the general sense."

Can staff please advise what the proper course of action is if we agree with and accept the conduct policy, but have serious concerns over somebody being held to rules that did not exist at the time of infraction?

Thanks,
Andrew

This new policy will be explicitly discussed at player meeting before game on, and you can try and grab Eli before then, if you would like.

All discipline is done in a super confidential way, so I'm surprised any actions are even being discussed here.

In any case, Steph handles the actual disciplinary actions, so I would reserve your speculations until she actually has the time to weigh in.

Steph has more than earned my trust, over and over again. I'm going to go with the benefit of the doubt here. It would be a shocking reversal of her personality to design a disciplinary system intended to start a witch hunt.

There are rational humans behind this policy. Any vague wording can be fixed and is likely unintentional.

I suppose we could attach a "Spirit of the Rule" disclaimer on this policy. The spirit is to give people clear ways to opt-in, and clear consequences for purposefully ignoring opt-in. I don't think this policy will be used in a strict letter-of-the-law interpretation to make people paranoid of accidental missteps or retroactive punishments.

Now I'm just speculating. I'll go back to my main point: I trust Steph. Please offer her the same courtesy. Until she has time away from running the event, I would encourage you to contact Ben.

---

Brian Paul!
-Prop Boss, Plot Team, Rules Comm, Other Stuff

Brian, I agree completely regarding the policy itself. My trust in Steph is one of the major reasons that I'm completely comfortable accepting the policy as written, and its potential revisions down the road. My problem is 100% regarding the application/leveraging of said policy in response to an issue that occurred before the policy even existed, and before anybody had an opportunity to accept it as we're being asked to do right now.

I think it warrants saying: as someone working as a feather and actively collecting feedback and bringing it up with staff, Steph, Steph P, Eli and Ben have been very quick to not only respond to the concerns I have been presenting, but to directly address concerns I have brought to them. We've had some excellent conversations about some very difficult topics, and I have full faith that these conversations will start to be addressed.

---

Rymaus Liena “Ellie” Dax

Andrew, I completely understand your concern, and I have that same concern.

I'm just saying it feels like we're rumor mongering here. Discipline actions are handled very privately. I don't even know the details of this or any other disciplinary action. I highly doubt Steph will discuss the details with anyone, but it seems this particular case needed to be shared with the team that drafted this policy.

I just want people to understand that there may be some misinformation due to the need for Steph to maintain a person's confidentiality and thus necessitating some vagueness.

I'm not advocating for retroactive punishments. I just want people to understand that privacy concerns will limit how much specific information can be discussed.

---

Brian Paul!
-Prop Boss, Plot Team, Rules Comm, Other Stuff

Let me be clear: these policies will NOT be applied retroactively, and I have deleted the two comments by staff members who incorrectly said that they would be.

All previous actions have been evaluated under that system, including any appeals that were made under that system.

Everyone going forward into this new system is getting a one-time clean slate. If they have been issued a warning or a suspension in the past, it is cleared and they will accrue disciplinary actions just as if they never had been.

Anyone who has been fully disinvited from the game remains disinvited from the game.

I apologize that my well-meaning staff members issued that incorrect statement, which is not in line with the values of Future Imperfect 2.

To avoid any further misinterpretation, I'd like you to hold your questions until player meeting. Thank you Ben, Eli, Spaige, I will take it from here.

-Steph

Very glad that this has been handled, and to not have to give up my Feather. Happy to serve these policies going forward if Steph and the PTB still want me to.

I have read and accept the FI2 Behavioral Conduct Policy

I have read and accept the FI2 Behavioral Conduct Policy.

-Scott Kaluzny

I have read this policy and accepted it.

Forgot to get back to this post happenings.
I have read and accept the FI2 Behavioral Conduct Policy.