The following are the basic rules and guidelines to help players manage their character relationships with other player characters in the game.

Why is this important?
To protect and ensure player boundaries are respected
To ensure a player is not taken advantage of
To help manage expectations

Just like in life there are many kinds of relationships that may develop ICly between characters: child-parent, sibling, romantic, employer-employee, protective, etc, are just some examples. These may put a player character in an authoritative position over another player character. This is a lot of responsibility and work both OOCly and ICly and can easily end up hurting another player if one is not careful.

Player boundaries take precedence above all else when it comes to these kinds of relationships, especially as between some characters it can become quite negative. Some players may not be interested or unable to pursue certain types of rp for any reasons. It doesn’t matter if the character would do it, if the player doesn’t want to do that kind of roleplay, do not force them to. It can be extremely harmful for the player to be put in that kind of situation. Even if they do not share the specifics for their reasons, they are to be respected.

So if a player says no, then do not do it. No comes in many forms, the rule is - unless there is an absolute and clear yes that they are ok with the direction of the relationship rp as is, anything else should be taken as a no - period.

A player wishing to partake of such relationship rp must make regular OOC check ins with the other player(s) to make sure they are ok with the direction and tone of the RP as it progresses, as well as to make they are not blocking the player’s ability to play their character. Never assume that the other player will be ok with any change in the rp, even if it is a type of rp they have done before, always ask!

When a player comes along that is not aware of the relationship and what the players have agreed upon, the players involved in the relationship should make sure that the other player is made aware of what could happen, and why some of the roleplay may go the direction it does. This is to help prevent the unaware player from feeling uncomfortable in the situation, and understand that everything going on in the RP is ICly and agreed upon.

If at any time a player becomes uncomfortable or feeling like their boundaries have not been respected with the relationship or begins to feel like they are being blocked and can’t do anything on their character due to the relationship they are encouraged to start a conversation with the other player(s) involved and let them know. This way the players can work out an alternative way to take the rp to resolve this. If the players on their own can not come to a resolution, then the player is encouraged to bring the situation to the attention of Social. Social can assign them a mediator to help come to a compromise or to help work out an exit strategy from the IC relationship with Setting on hand to advise as needed. Remember at any time a player has the right to opt out of an IC relationship.

• A player can not control a character that is not theirs.
• A player can not use an IC relationship to prevent another player from taking the involved character to sessions.
• A player can not use an IC relationship to prevent another player from rping with other players on the involved character or other rp in general.
• A player can not use an IC relationship to force another player to give their character items or silver.
• A player can not use an IC relationship to force another player to do RP topics that they do not want to participate in.
• A player can not use an IC relationship to harass, abuse, or threaten another player OOCly.

A player is not obligated to play out every single moment of any kind of relationship or employment and can not be force to do so.

Underaged PC relationships

Underaged is defined as any character that is physically or mentally under the age of 18 or even looks under the age of 18. In these games underaged is flagged as a special condition that requires Setting approval in order to play. This is due to that in that some scenes underage characters are not appropriate for as well as the expectations of many IC interactions from both PCs and NPCs already put older characters in a kind of authoritative position over the underage character.

• Setting Approval for Conditions
Underage characters are not permitted to partake in romantic or erotic RP. It may be implied, but it can not actually be roleplayed out on this site ever.

• Mature Sexual Content, Romantic and Erotic Role Play Policy
Players of underage characters should be prepared for their character to be treated like a child at any time. This can manifest in many ways but usually in the form of being commanded to do something with no explanation, to leave a potentially bad or extremely dangerous scene, physically be dragged away from something perceived as harmful or to get them out of harm's way, or scolded or reprimanded for their actions. Setting will cover these expectations with the player submitting an underage character after reviewing the character and the player’s history. This is to ensure the player understands what may happen in play, and to encourage them to open OOC channels with other players to let them know what is ok to do to exercise authority over their character and that they expect it.

Players interacting with an underage PC should keep in mind ways to also exercise their character’s authority over the underage in a way to help keep them involved in the session or rp in some way. Checking in with the player of the underage PC with a heads up on what may happen is highly encouraged.

Employment of a PC by a PC

In addition to the above there are some extra rules in regards to IC employment between PCs.

The hiring process is handled like a recruitment session between a NPC and a player. The players of the characters involved will make a request on the SH forums for a SH to run the numbers and officiate the hiring for them. The PC employer should ask questions related to the position being offered as well as request a demonstration of the potential PC employee’s skills that would apply to the job. At the end the SH may recommend an econ score boost, but the PC employer shall determine what is earned if the potential PC employee was hired. Then the SH will record the recruitment on the forums and make any adjustments to the econ score as needed or available. (This follows the same rules as other econ score bonuses and can not go past the +15 max gain per character.).

If the PC employer plans to give the employee a raise or promotion, there should be RP to point to that shows the promotion was earned. In cases where there is the possibility of an econ boost it must also be handled like a recruitment session so there is a record. If there is no boost to econ or other character Stats then a scene can be made to help record the RP that proves the promotion was earned. Similarly, to demote or fire someone, there should be an IC reason to point to, and can also be made into a scene to help keep a record.

The PC employer player can not make one of the terms of employment to have the PC employee give their employer a set amount silver or demand their PC employee make their character items because they work for them. This is in essence forcing another player to give them silver or items. ICly it is already implied that the PC employee is already contributing to the business in some manner, and while it could be said that the employer does take something (especially in regards to commission) no actual exchange of silver or items takes place.

This policy also helps keep PC employers as a viable option for other PCs for work, as if a PC employer takes away actual silver or items, this will make a PC employer less appealing than a NPC employer - who gets no actual silver or items and still provides all the perks of being employed. The perk of a PC hiring a PC is the opportunity for RP and collaboration for those characters.

Be sure to also review the rules on Transfer of items or money between characters for additional considerations linked to IC relationships.

Slow-Posting
Slow-Posting is a phrase used to describe roleplaying that occurs at a much slower pace then 'normal' and cannot happen immediately in one sitting.

In ‘fast-posting’ roleplay, players are able to immediately respond to each other's posts and have set aside a few hours to play out an entire scene, start to finish. In slow-posting roleplay, players don't all have to be on during the same window, which may work better with some players' schedules for work, school, and other activities. Slow-posting allows those people to still be able to keep the roleplaying going, just at a slower pace.

In casual slow-post RP, there are no enforced time limits on when people should respond (just like in fast-posting casual RP). A slow-posting session, on the other hand, is something you should only join if you can commit to posting once daily for 1-2 weeks. In a slow-posting session, even a short post is a good post if it keeps the round moving so that the session doesn't stall out.

If you are in casual slow-posting RP with someone, and they haven’t posted in 2 or more days, drop them a friendly reminder over private messaging to check in and see if they wish to continue the RP. Similarly, if you are in a slow-post RP and know that something is coming up that will make you unlikely to keep up with the once-a-day schedule, let the other players know either via the OOC box with your character in the room or via private messaging so they know what to expect.

For A/SHs running slow-posing sessions, if a player has not posted in over a day, you are not just allowed but encouraged to proceed to the next round, effectively skipping that character in favor of keeping the session moving. Players can try to get caught up in future rounds when their real-life schedule allows. When you run a slow-post session, be careful to consider how this might impact the way you design your challenges.

If you are in a casual slow-posting RP and require A/SH oversight, just like in fast-posting RP, pause the action until you can get a qualified A/SH to rule or address whatever needs oversight. For their consideration, it may be wise to schedule a time to switch to fast-posting until the action that requires A/SH oversight is completed before switching back to slow-posting format, if desired.

Vaxia's players and administration will not tolerate harassment of any of our players by anyone, regardless of their role on the site.

Our site defines harassment as any behavior that is threatening, abusive, or which espouses any racist, sexist or other hate-mongering philosophy. Repeatedly contacting (or "hounding") one of our players can also be considered harassment if you are asked to stop and do not do so.

Refer to the Code of Conduct for additional guidelines on healthy and respectful behavior on vaxia.org. This definition is not exhaustive, and behavior judged by two or more administrators to fall into a similarly abusive pattern whether it's explicitly addressed here or not may also constitute grounds for a Strike.

This definition extends to the in-character world to a degree - while we encourage freedom of character concepts and choices, including those which may veer into the hateful or vindictive, any suggestion that abusive behavior IC is motivated by out-of-character inclinations will be met with similar warnings and punishments as out-of-character harassment. If you are asked by another player or the site's administration to reduce the level of abrasive or offensive roleplay, please do so for the overall health of the site. Failure to respect the request will result in similar warnings and punishments.

While we hope it will never be an issue, we also prohibit any form of sexual harassment or misconduct on the site, in or out of character. That includes stalking, threats and any non-consensual conversations or RP of a sexual nature. It also includes textual accounts of romantic or sexual conduct with a minor, which applies to both players below the age of 18 and characters with an Apparent Age or Effective age less than 18 (depending on the character's race). Vaxia prohibits any such misconduct, and violations will be met with swift repercussions.

If your behavior is considered to constitute harassment, you will be warned by the site's administration or SH corps. You may ask for clarification on the nature of the offense, and we will strive to provide you with alternatives which do not offend or endanger our players. Continued behavior along similar lines will be met with a Strike (which remains on your account record permanently), and three Strikes will result in an immediate ban from the site. Any continued harassment of our players away from vaxia.org may be further met with legal action as necessary.

Anyone who feels they are the subject of harassment on or off the site by one of our players should immediately contact the current World and Academy heads and the site administrator using the Contact link at the top of the page. If you're unsure if the behavior qualifies as harassment, please contact us to be sure - we would much rather deal with an excess of claims which ultimately prove to be benign than risk any genuine harassment going unreported.

We want everyone to feel safe here on vaxia.org, which is why we remain firm in our handling of harassment cases to better protect our players so that they can enjoy their time and roleplay without fear or abuse.

When an entirely new account is created on Vaxia, the new player is temporary in a probationary state, a kind of grace period during which any kinks in communication and understanding can be worked out.

During this period, the player is given slightly more IC flexibility. Misunderstandings of the IC world are more easily forgiven, provided they aren't repeated once the player has been notified. This does not mean the new player has unusual influence on the IC world, just that their misconceptions may be ret-conned or set aside without any major fuss as part of the natural process of figuring our the expansive IC worlds.

By contrast, the player's out-of-character behavior is slightly more scrutinized to ensure that they abide by our Code of Conduct and are deemed a good fit for the site. Any OOC infractions during this time may result in the player's account being deactivated depending on their severity. We will endeavor as a site to work with new players to acclimate them to the community, but if a solution cannot be found during this window, the account may be deactivated for the overall health of the site.

The probationary period for new accounts will continue until they have acquired at least 40 XP worth of roleplay across the sum of their characters. At that point, they are a fully-fledged member of the site, able to apply to become an SH and otherwise participate in and serve the community exactly as the rest of us do. Beyond the 40 XP mark, seniority grants no special authority on the site to any of us.

"Transparency is operating in such a way that it is easy for others to see what actions are performed."

This means for the most part: In public. In writing. Openly.

Why? Because this keeps us honest, it increases the trust of our player base and storyhost base, and generally it keeps us on our toes. A bad idea will get punctured more quickly. A good idea will get support more quickly. Transparency isn't meant to be used as a weapon, it's meant to be used as a sanitizer - sunlight to make it clear and obvious that all those acting are doing so in good faith.

Which isn't to say every single little thing needs to be handled in the open. Personal disputes, SH saga negotiations, inter-player resolution - all of these things can be handled privately as needed. The concerned parties are already in the room after all.

Where things need to be transparent is when the concerned parties are the entire site. Criticism of leadership is a public concern (as is praise!). New rule handling, or modifications of site policy - all are public concerns. While the initial germination of an idea can be handled privately, at some point the work needs to go public, for both public review and public accountability of the decision makers involved.

Public review means: Not on AIM, not on email, not on PM. In Discussion room isn't a public enough location, and chat scroll could effectively erase the conversation from view. Public means, in the forums.

Because the SHs, Evaluators and Leads of Vaxia are also players and people, there exists the possibility that they will find themselves in a position of having to rule something which relates to them directly, or someone for whom they cannot be objective. For example, if a Setting lead needs a powerful NPC approved, or someone from System has to retake the SH test for certification, there's the potential that their position may lead to accidental or intentional bias for or against them.

Likewise, bias can exist between heads, SHs or evaluators and other players, either because they are close in real life or because there is past bad blood between them.

In all such cases, a separate, neutral party should arbitrate the issue, even if that party does not typically have the authority to do so. Because all head positions are duplicated (two Setting leads, two System leads, two site administrators, two Social leads), there should always be someone other than the individual proposing the change who can rule it objectively. If a situation arises in which that is not the case, either because both leads are involved in the generation of the idea that needs approval, or because one of them is absent from the site when approval is needed, then at least two SHs or evaluators must approve the issue.

If both Setting leads, for instance, want to run a site-wide saga that goes beyond the range of influence of a normal SH, they should get the idea approved by at least two regular SHs before moving forward. Likewise, the answers for an System head retaking the SH test to renew their position should be reviewed by two regular SHs, if the other System lead is not present or easily reachable.

SHs ruling for those close to them in real life (specifically spouses and the like) should ask another SH or evaluator to check their work to ensure a fair ruling. This applies both to sessions (and the associated difficulties, XP and item rewards) and evaluated content (items or characters created by their spouse).

If you suspect someone may be making a decision while under the influence of a Conflict of Interest notify any SH or post your concern on the forums, whichever you feel comfortable doing. Your concern should be stated plainly, without venom, and please be ready to listen to those you've addressed defend themselves and those about whom the ruling was made. Oftentimes, conflict of interest is something people do without realizing it, out of an instinct to be kind. While it can be dangerous, it is often not malicious. Please remember that.

There are enough SHs and other leads that drawing attention to the issue and bringing it under scrutiny from others should suffice to ensure there is no unfair treatment at work, so that we can all get back to enjoying the site and the RP.

SHs, Sessions and Their Own Characters

Because it comes up somewhat often, an SH is allowed to play one of their own characters in a session they are running, under two conditions: their character cannot be awarded XP for participating in the session, and their character cannot serve as the 'star' of the session, similar to our NPC Policy. Any SH doing so should be prepared to provide a record of rulings involving their character (difficulties set, circumstantial modifiers, etc).

NOTE: For many SHs, playing a character while also running a session may prove problematic to the session itself, slowing down the ruling process and the general flow, so it is recommended that SHs abstain from participating in their own sessions unless they feel confident they can RP, rule and narrate at the same time.

By and large, Vaxian RP tends to be emotional and immersive. Normally, this is why we love it, but it does have one major downside: sudden losses in-character can have very real impacts on us out-of-character.

When that impact affects us in a real and noticeable way, we call it Real Life Harm (RLH), which is above and beyond the more minor emotional lows that might come from a bad guy getting away in a session or a streak of bad dice rolls. Real Life Harm can lead to genuine emotional difficult in our real lives, which is something we want to spare our players whenever we can.

For that reason, we have the No Real Live Harm (NRLH) rule. This policy is designed as a safety net to avert an in-character event that would result in Real Life Harm and replace it with one that isn't so damaging out-of-character.

The NRLH rule only applies to in-character circumstances, but it is not limited to anything in particular. It may be Character Death serious injury, loss of a treasured NPC, or a different major turning point. When invoked, the NRLH rule will update the outcome, but it should not be mistaken for an "undo" button - the new outcome will be as close to an equivalent as we can make it without doing harm.

For instance, character death might be replaced by serious injury that takes them out of the session or fight. It might result in stat changes to reflect a loss of limb or other function. Death of a beloved NPC might instead become a kidnapping that requires a great deal of silver to resolve. The exact circumstances are up to the ruling A/SH, who should work with the player invoking NRLH to determine what the next-best outcome would be to avoid the harm.

Invoking RLH
In some instances, A/SHs may prompt a player to ask about RLH, such as when their character just died in a session. Other times, it will be up to the player to invoke the NRLH rule.

In the latter case, use the Private Message system to contact the ruling A/SH. Let them know exactly what incident in the RP caused you RLH and give a rough explanation of what about it caused you harm so that they can adjust the scenario accordingly.

Remember that you may not get exactly what you want - in fact, it's best not to ask for specific alternative outcomes, as most A/SHs still want to help craft a scene rather than just narrate what you've given them. If you explain what about the scene caused you harm, you can trust them to design a new outcome based on those concerns.

If RLH happens in an RP that doesn't have a ruling A/SH, check the current list of A/SH members of the Social Department and reach out to one to invoke RLH. It would be best to pause the RP while your claim is being considered.

When NRLH does NOT apply
There are several situations where the NRLH rule cannot be invoked because of the nature of the RP or session itself.

• If you willingly consent to PvP, you cannot invoke NRLH if your character is seriously injured or killed in the contest. This includes if you have the "PvP allowed" flag on your character, so be sure to check it if you aren't ready to lose the character. The default setting is "no."
• If you attend a session with the "Character death possible" flag, you cannot invoke NRLH due to character death in that session. This includes if you have the "character death allowed" flag on your character, so be sure to check it if you aren't ready to lose the character. The default setting is "no."
• If an A/SH informs you of the potential consequences of an action out-of-character before you take it, and you take it anyway, you cannot then invoke NRLH after the fact to attempt to undo or change those consequences

If character death specifically would cause you RLH, we recommend saving up for a Save Point (explained under the Character Death rules) so that you can participate in character-death-flagged sessions or PvP without worrying about permanently losing the character.

A/SHs handling Real-Life Harm Rulings
If you're an A/SH and a player in a session or scene you're ruling has invoked NRLH, follow the process below

• If you're in the middle of the session/scene, update your ruling to something vague that removes the character from the remainder of the session/scene. A narrative like "Character A appears to be dead" leaves room for changes later after you've had time to consider the case.

• Let the player know that you are working with the Social department to review the case and will update them once a final ruling has been reached.

• Contact the Social Leads to report the claim, and include any details you feel are relevant for them to consider when reviewing it.

  NOTE: All NRLH cases need to be reviewed by at least two members of the Social department, of which the ruling A/SH cannot be one - the ruling A/SH has no influence on the NRLH ruling to protect them from reprisals and possible Conflict of Interest The Social department will rule on the NRLH claim and work with the player on an agreeable alternative outcome.

• Once the Social department members have approved it, add the ruling to the IC room as a narrative or simply to the Session Report after the fact so that others who attended the session will know the outcome and how to approach the affected character in future RP.

Don't hesitate with RLH
If you think an IC event might trigger RLH for you, even if you're not 100% sure, go ahead and invoke the rule as soon as you think there's good potential for harm. If, a day or two later, you realizing you aren't bothered by the original outcome, you can simply drop the claim.

If instead you find you're still bothered a few days later, you'll already be closer to a less harmful outcome that the ruling A/SH and the Social department have had time to consider and work on. It's far better to invoke the rule can then drop the claim than to think you'll be fine and then have to invoke well after the fact, which can be more difficult for the A/SH to post-date.

Remember: not every claim is going to be valid based on the conditions of the session/scene involved, and you are not guaranteed to get an outcome you love. The goal is to mitigate harm as much as possible without drastically changing the IC outcome, so the end result may still leave you a little bummed, but it should leave you far less hurt than the original and able to get back to RPing and enjoying the site as soon as possible.

So, in summary:

• The NRLH rule is not intended to cover all IC occurrences we find sad or disappointing.
• NRLH rule applies when IC occurrences cause us lasting damage to our real lives, that we can not otherwise cope with.
• The A/SH will do their best to be compassionate and empathetic to your feelings, especially when you feel you may be suffering RLH, but may not be able to give you exactly what you ask for
• Invoking the NRLH rule is a serious thing, but that should not stop you from invoking it if you believe you are suffering RLH

The most core principle to Vaxia, in and out of character, is the balance of the 3 F's: fun, freedom and fairness.

The words are self-explanatory, but it's the order that matters:

1. Fun - The general enjoyment of the members
2. Freedom - The freedom to do what you like, as long as it doesn't hurt other people's fun or freedom
3. Fairness - The leveling stick that will keep anyone from getting the short end of the stick in site matters

We have a lot of rules and policies in place that ensure fairness, but notice that it's at the bottom of the list. Sometimes, if something is fun and doesn't negatively impact the fun and freedom of others, the rules matter a little less. The rules and guidelines are supposed to be something that ensures everyone gets their equal share of the fun here, they should never become like a weight around your neck, or an excuse to level things for leveling's sake. Fairness is valuable insofar as it protects people's fun, and it should be considered, but it shouldn't be the guiding star for how we operate day to day.

That should be guided by what we find fun :)

Think of this like a Venn diagram. You want to target that triangle where all three are part of whatever you're doing. But if you've got to pick which direction to go outside of that triangle - go with Fun.

If you haven't read this little book I highly recommend it. It's a quick, easy read and more than worth its weight in gold, written by Don Miguel Ruiz. For the most part, the ideas are not new (in fact, they're ancient), but they are no less relevant today here in Vaxia.

I will list each of The Four Agreements and the way I believe those agreements can be applied to Vaxia. The explanations are in my own words, so don't hold Ruiz to them.

Be impeccable with your word.

Simply put, be free from blame with what you say and promise. Let your words have integrity. Do not speak ill of yourself and do not speak ill of others.

Don't take things personally.

Life's too short. Even if something really is directed at you as a personal attack, you still don't have to take it personally. Who knows what prompted the other person to make such an attack? Maybe their own pain or ignorance. You do not need to fuel that fire with your own pain at the attack. Put the fire out by looking at situations as objectively as you can.

Don't make assumptions.

Get the whole story, or as much of it as you can. Don't jump to conclusions or make judgement calls without all the facts, and be ready to change your opinion if new facts emerge. Don't think because something was true in the past for someone that it must still be true. Don't imagine that because you have half the story that you have the entire account. Our assumptions can lead to unnecessarily hurt feelings that stem from coming to incorrect conclusions.

Do your best.

Perhaps the simplest in theory and the most difficult in practice. One's best varies from day to day and may be quite different when you're sick or angry than when you are in top form. When sick and angry, maybe my best is simply to avoid making negative comments in Limbo and not lashing out at someone when I get upset. And that's okay, that's my best, I can do that and be glad. But on a good day my best might be really helping the site, helping new people find their way around, making the site more enjoyable through roleplay and sessions, or what have you.

To us, as a community, Vaxia is our world. And we as a community work to keep it one we always want to come back to. I love what I see in Vaxia today and I'm glad to be a part of it.

If we can all keep to these agreements, I think we can help others feel the same way.

The Code of Conduct or in other words, how we like to behave and treat each other on this site, and in Vaxia.

This document defines how players must conduct themselves while on the Vaxia site. It applies to all areas on the site, including the Vaxia and Sirian game worlds, as well as any chat rooms, forums, wiki, artwork libraries, and private messages offered through the site. Activity conducted off-site (such as via email, chat, in-person, etc.) may also be considered a violation of the Vaxia Code of Conduct and grounds for disciplinary action if it is conducted between Vaxia players, and believed to be in response to or an extension of actions conducted on Vaxia. It is a series of guidelines and etiquette that we hope will be followed. All visitors on the site are expected to follow the code of conduct. Failure to do so may result in disciplinary action, including notations, strikes, temporary suspensions, permanent bans, other corrective action, or worse.

This list is not comprehensive. However this will cover the most obvious points. When in doubt, be considerate of each other, try to use your best judgement, and ask ahead of time. If it would hurt you if someone did the same action, don't do it. If you think that it would harm someone or ruin their fun here, don't do it. If a player asks you not to do something or to stop doing it, please respect that. If you are uncertain whether another player will be upset, ask politely and respect the answer.

Inappropriate behavior includes (but is not limited to):

- Attacking other players (i.e., verbal assault, slander, threats, etc.).

- Harassing other players (unsolicited sexual advances, hounding, gossiping about, etc. whether in or out of character, directed at the player or at the player’s characters without consent IC or OOC, etc).

- Intentionally disrupting sessions OOC.

- Initiating or continuing a role-play session with a player who has stated OOC that they do not wish to participate, regardless of session content.

- ‘Flaming’ or ‘Griefing’ other players.

- Blackmailing or extorting other players.

- Using Private Messages or off-site messages to harm another player.

- Falsely posing as a lead or mediator for any reason.

- Manipulating of others (overt or covert aggression, baiting or goading, guilt-tripping, chase-me behaviors, verbal abuse, or other emotional manipulation techniques).

- Exploiting/cheating the game system/website.

- Defacing the Wiki or any other part of the website.

- Linking to/displaying pornography or other offensive, illegal, or harmful content on site.

- Posting sexually explicit, racist, or excessively violent content in publicly accessible locations, regardless of format.

- Non-compliance to formal requests/instruction from a Lead when they are acting in their role as department lead or as site admin.

- Attempts to access or copy another user’s password, or attempts to access another user’s account.

- Maintaining multiple user accounts without specific authorization by the site administration.

Any other unspecified action that brings undue harm to an individual, or the community, or the web site may also be punishable with a yellow strike or even a red depending on the severity. Any of these actions are grounds for disciplinary action. Not all activities are considered equal transgressions. Disciplinary action may vary based on the severity and frequency of the offense, and will be conducted by the rules documented by the Social Department

If the appropriateness/perceived harm of an action is under dispute, a site Lead is authorized to act immediately based on the perceived situation. If requested by any involved party, the Social Department will review and vote upon the action and determine appropriate disciplinary measures (if any). Strikes for such unspecified actions ought to be voted upon by the Social department, but the Leads don't need to wait for the result of the vote if they feel it is irresponsible to not act quickly. If their decision is then voted down, the outcome will be reversed.

Returning players, please note: We no longer follow the previous Vaxia policy of "negative in private, positive in public”.

See also: The Four Agreements General Guidelines