# Community rules clarity survey

Check whether participation rules are understandable.

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

## 1. Which rule needs an example?

Answer: ____________________

## 2. What behavior boundary was unclear?

Answer: ____________________

## 3. What explanation would help?

Answer: ____________________

## Author notes / illustrative keys where applicable

1. Use this answer to locate the part of the experience that needs explanation. The example issue to investigate is: members interpret disagreement and harassment as the same category.
2. A behavior boundary shows where a participation rule permits competing interpretations. Describe the specific permitted or restricted behavior and an appropriate clarification route without adjudicating individual allegations.
3. Turn the requested improvement into a testable next step. One illustrative action is: provide approved examples of respectful disagreement.

Interpretation caution: Do not collect allegations through a general survey.


## Illustrative finding and follow-up

Observation: Members interpret disagreement and harassment as the same category.

Action to test: Provide approved examples of respectful disagreement.

Follow-up: After trying the change, repeat “Which rule needs an example?” with people who experienced it. Check whether they still describe the original issue: members interpret disagreement and harassment as the same category. Compare explanations and sample context, rather than claiming the change caused an improvement.