If you just announced the policy at the start of the event, wouldn’t that make it clear enough for everyone?
Something like …
″ Hey, we know the facilitators are amazing and some of you will fall in love with them during the event, but for safety and community reasons we are sorry to inform everyone that we have a rule that they are off limits for 3 months after this events, and you are off limits to them. Please don’t flirt with them too much or ask them on a date. We know this is a bit weird but we think it’s probably for the best.”
That was my first crack at it, but you get the picture :D
If you just announced the policy at the start of the event, wouldn’t that make it clear enough for everyone?
Something like …
″ Hey, we know the facilitators are amazing and some of you will fall in love with them during the event, but for safety and community reasons we are sorry to inform everyone that we have a rule that they are off limits for 3 months after this events, and you are off limits to them. Please don’t flirt with them too much or ask them on a date. We know this is a bit weird but we think it’s probably for the best.”
That was my first crack at it, but you get the picture :D
My confusion is actually over the intent, and not the implementation. Like, both of these are things I could see people proposing:
Facilitators don’t make any advances towards attendees.
Additionally attendees don’t towards facilitators.
I currently am guessing Severin is proposing (2), but the “non-escalation” phrasing meant I wanted to check whether they actually meant (1).
Oh, I interpreted it as clearly 2, 90 percent confident ;).