Clarification of Strasz moderation guidance, Contradiction

Hello, My group follows TOS and community guidelines to the T. We have combed over both TOS and community guidelines many times, but primarily we go off of a post made by Strasz (VRChat senior community manager). In regard to private 18+ AV instances. As shown here.

“Private” Instances & Malicious Reporting

We see a lot of anxiety regarding malicious reporting in private spaces. The reality is that it is necessary for Group owners, Group members, event runners, and event attendees to exercise additional caution when it comes to ensuring that the content that they employ is used in the right place, and at the right time.

In our Community Guidelines, we state an important rule: provocative behavior restrictions may not apply in Private instances, as long as everyone present consents.

It is the responsibility of the “present authority” to ensure that everyone in the instance has provided consent. The “present authority” is the instance creator, event runners, group or venue moderators, a party host, a game master, or whatever is appropriate – it’s just whoever is “in charge” of your private instance.

For example, if you ran a group or event that had this in its rules:

“If you join this group/this event, you may or may not encounter provocative activities or content, and if you join this group/event, you indicate consent to view these activities or content.”

(The phrasing and semantics are important!)

This would serve the purpose of gathering consent. In those cases, you should also run that instance or event as an 18+ Verified Group instance. As always, use your own best judgment – it is your responsibility to ensure that attendees know what they are walking into, and you should employ every tool available to let them know, and fulfill that responsibility.

*We recognize that this method is brittle at best – however, it serves the purpose to help protect you from “malicious reporting,” while impressing upon you the importance of your responsibility as someone who might run a private instance or event. Thanks to various safeguards and procedures, the risk of malicious reporting is already quite low. We plan to iterate on our systems and policies over time to further reduce this risk.

Despite this, one of our mods has been suspended for what we can only assume is posting about one of our events to our private group. The group and the instance are always private and VRC AV 18+.

The group info does include the phrasing provided by Strasz to serve the purpose of gathering consent, and all group instances are operated as Group Only Instances with 18+ VRC age verification.

I feel it’s necessary that this very important info posted by Strasz be evaluated for clarity. I’d also like to note that in this particular situation, the account sanction sent to users needs more details, so that users have a full understanding of what the problem is, It seems purposely vague, resulting in users accidentally reoffending. I think that assuming the person always knows what they have done wrong is irresponsible.

If we have been misled by Straszes’ post, then please let it be known. If it is legitimate, then please add it to the rules.

Staff, Thank you for your time, and feel free to contact me for more info if needed.

I am not an expert on this, but I believe the intent is for them to appeal the suspension and state some of what you just mentioned. That the group instance was moderated, and the group had a rule about contenting upon joining. Then the moderation team can check if that clears up what was reported or not.

1 Like

For sure. also I feel this rule should be added to the rules for everyone to see and not just on the VRC ask forum. But as you said, our Mod has appealed the suspension, and we are waiting to hear back. I feel responsible because it was my group instance he opened. So its weird that he got the suspension when it was a notification for my private group. Communication with staff can be difficult, so we can only hope for the best. The only info they gave was the name of the notification.

I was the mod who had received the suspension. VRChat did review my appeal and remove the suspension. I am still confused how this happened as it shouldn’t of happened and VRChat has repeatdly said a person reviews all suspensions before they are enacted and are not using bots to do so. If that’s the case the suspension should of never been instituted.

1 Like

Update. The suspension was appealed! So now I have my Mod back. We suspect that a bot had picked up the report and action was taken before review, but we do not know for sure due to lack of transparency when it comes to this sort of thing. This does bring up many questions, though. Are bots being used? And how often?

It can be stressful when you feel like you are following the rules, yet you’re still getting dinged for something, and they won’t tell you what it is. The “You know what you did” approach needs to change. As for most normal users, that might be the case, but for us who are desperately trying to keep things in order and build a community, it’s awful.

Though im happy our Mod is back, I would love for staff to have a conversation about how this can be improved in the future and maybe share that info with everyone. Constantly being in the dark is helping no one.