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.
)