Right to Review Policy
1. Purpose
We all have an incentive for and want decisions about in-game actions to be thorough and fair. At the same time, it helps none of us to get stuck in never-ending back-and-forth over decisions that have already been addressed. This policy sets out a simple, and standardized way to revisit an action result when truly new information comes up, while avoiding repeated re-litigation of every outcome.
2. Grounds for Requesting a Review
You can request a review if: • Genuinely New or Overlooked Information – You can point to important details that weren’t considered initially and could meaningfully affect the result.
Significant Impact – The new or missed info is substantial enough that it is likely to materially change the outcome.
Disagreeing with a decision on principle, opinion, or because it wasn’t what you hoped for isn’t, by itself, sufficient.
3. Submitting a Request
Explain the Context:
Briefly recap the action and the original result.
Share What’s New:
Describe the information you believe was overlooked or couldn’t have been provided originally, and why it matters.
One Request per Decision:
If you have anything you want reconsidered, include it all in one go. Repeated requests about the same ruling will be turned away unless there’s entirely new info.
Timeliness:
Send your request within a reasonable period (e.g., within a couple of days) so we don’t hold up game progress or enter a situation where a wider retcon is required.
4. The Review Process
Assessment of Grounds for Review:
A moderator who wasn’t involved in processing your action will check whether the new info meets the above criteria.
Note: Being granted a review means the new info is important enough to revisit, but it doesn’t guarantee the final result will change or that the expected impact of the change will be as the request suggests.
Re-Evaluation by the Original Processor:
If the request is approved, the moderator who originally processed your action will revisit the decision in consultation with the moderator who assessed the ground for review. They may update or confirm their initial ruling based on the new details.
Final Ruling:
Once the result is reissued, it’s considered final—no further appeals will be accepted unless completely new information surfaces later on.
5. Community Harmony
Collaborative, Not Adversarial:
The review process isn’t about dodging accountability, it’s simply a structured process to ensure important missed info is taken into account.
Be Respectful & Concise:
Keep reviews to the point, and focus on the facts.
No Endless Re-Litigation:
Once a final call is made, please move forward, not every action is going to go anyone’s way, effort spent re-litigating processed actions is effort better spent moving forward within the game.