If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate.

How easy is it to understand the community rules?
Do you know how to report a concern?
What would make moderation decisions easier to understand?
How clear is the explanation after a moderation decision?
Which rule needs a concrete example?

Author notes / illustrative keys where applicable:
1. Locate a rule whose meaning members cannot apply to a real discussion. Provide a neutral approved example rather than assume more prominent rules resolve interpretation problems.
2. Check whether members can identify the established concern-reporting route. Make it discoverable while keeping allegations and identifiable incident details out of general questionnaire comments.
3. Identify missing context that would explain a moderation decision's basis or review route. Describe the actual process without implying every disputed decision must be reversed.
4. Check whether the explanation identifies the relevant rule and what happens next. Separate unclear communication from disagreement with the decision or disclosure of another person's case.
5. Choose a rule that needs a realistic boundary example so members can distinguish allowed disagreement from prohibited conduct. Have the responsible moderation team verify that example.