CB.8:4.1 - Explain the expectations needed for the activity

Begin with the useful participation and a concrete way it can fail. In a case exchange, participants need to challenge the proposed explanation and protect confidential case details. In a shared feed, repeated promotional posts may make requests hard to find. At a workshop, access or equipment rules may be necessary to carry out the activity.

State what a participant should do, the relevant boundary and why it matters. Include a short example where the distinction is easy to misread. For instance: disclose an affiliation when recommending one’s own tool, explain its relevance to the question, and use the designated offer space for unrelated promotion. A blanket restriction may still be appropriate for a particular activity; choose it for that activity’s conditions.

Separate subject standards from conduct rules. A technical claim can be wrong and need correction; a person can challenge it strongly while following the participation rules. Conversely, a correct claim does not justify repeated personal intimidation. Domain judgement and incident handling may both be needed, with different recipients.

Make expectations available where people enter and act. Explain the few consequential conditions before an event, link the relevant guidance at a posting point and provide an accessible way to ask. A participant should be able to understand an expectation before making a conspicuous contribution. Explain real limits on privacy instead of promising that anything said in a group will remain confidential.

Retain adequate existing rules. Revise an unclear or ineffective rule through its actual decision arrangement, with affected participants able to explain the practical consequences. State when the revision takes effect. Clarifying future conduct and judging past conduct are different decisions; do not silently treat a newly invented expectation as an earlier agreement.