Your rule 4 is -slightly- less restrictive than site rules for ongoing games. As the locksticky thread explains, as a game moderator you have the ability to say that you will relax constraints for players to discuss
your game
in other places, but a game moderator does not have the freedom to relax constraints on
other moderator's games
being discussed within the game thread. It's only slightly less restrictive than site rules, but you should still pull it into alignment. Micc's templating for "I have a read, but I can't say exactly why because of ongoing games" or "I have a read, but I can't explain it to you because of the ongoing games rule" is agnostic to whether one particular game is informing the read or maybe several because "games" is plural and not singular.
If you simply change it from singular to plural, it's in alignment with site rules and it's fine.
I'm fascinated by shared reminiscent breadcrumbing remark. It's a good rule and I might steal it.
Please remove "similar L-words like launch" or think about modifying it. There's a contingent of players phoneposting "lunch" onsite because a phone autocorrects "lynch" to "lunch", and the resulting word isn't logical, it only leads the reader to think "this person typed lynch and left it uncorrected form phone autocorrect". At least one other listmod is concerned about how appropriate that usage is. "Launch" itself I'm somewhat more unsure about and don't want to go on record about. Yeet and fade are excellent.
"Let us say that you are right and there are two worlds. How much, then, is this 'other world' worth to you? What do you have there that you do not have here? Money? Power? Something worth causing the prince so much pain for?'"
"Well, I..."
"What? Nothing? You would make the prince suffer over... nothing?"