Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.project > #10187
| From | Joerg Jaspert <da-manager@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.project |
| Subject | Appeal procedure for DAM actions |
| Date | 2019-01-07 23:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <xdLIT-5dG-29@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| Organization | Ganneff |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
Hello everyone,
One of the things that emerged from the recent discussions around DAM actions
is that we are missing a way to review or appeal DAM's decision. Currently
the only way to do this is running a full-featured GR, with all the negative
side effects such a process has.
While a GR is a constitutional right, and the procedure we lay out here does
NOT take that away, we feel there is a need for a less drastic procedure that
would allow double-checking of DAM actions without escalating into a
project-wide dispute.
With this message we define a way to appeal a DAM action, that balances
between involving other members in the review, and ensuring that we have
sufficient independent oversight.
Although this defines a pretty strict timeline for the procedure to avoid a
long-running process, we waive the time limit defined in §1 for the cases from
the last 6 months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Appealing DAM decisions
--------------------------
Any person who had their Debian membership suspended or revoked by DAM may
appeal the decision. They must request the appeal within 30 days, stating why
they disagree with the decision in a mail to DAM. DAM will notify the New
Members Committee (NMC)[1][2] and Front Desk.
The original action taken by DAMs remains in force during the appeal.
2. DAM statement
----------------
Within 72 hours DAM will provide a statement to the NMC and the appealer with
their reasoning for the account status change.
DAM may also send additional material to the NMC only, encrypted to the
individual members, if they deem it necessary for the case, and if presenting
this to a wider public might cause issues of confidentiality for involved
third-parties. The NMC members are expected to avoid disclosing this material
to anyone else, including the appealer.[3]
3. Appealer statement
---------------------
Within a further 72 hours, the appealer has the opportunity to respond to the
DAM statement with their own statement.
4. NM Committee review
----------------------
The NMC has 7 days to review the received material and discuss the matter in
private. They are expected not to solicit further input, as this is not an
inquiry but a peer review of the DAM decision.
5. NM-Committee vote
--------------------
After 7 days discussion, or earlier if unanimously agreed by the NMC,
NM-Frontdesk will ask the secretary to conduct a secret, 3-day-long vote, with
the following options:
1. Uphold the decision of the DAMs
2. Overturn the decision of the DAMs
Committee members otherwise involved in a case must abstain.
DAM members are not allowed to partake in the vote.
A simple majority decides the vote; in the event of a tie, the decision is not
overturned.
Abstained or absent votes are not counted. If more than half of the NMC
(excluding DAM) abstain or do not vote, the decision is not overturned.
An independent Developer, usually the project secretary, conducts the vote. In
the event that the secretary is a partly involved in the case, DAMs will work
with the DPL to identify a suitable developer.
6. Action
---------
If the decision is overturned, the suspension or revocation of the account
will be turned into a warning. The previous account status will be reactived
and all changes to it undone at the earliest of the involved teams
convenience.[5]
If the decision is upheld, this process, like anything in Debian, does not
prevent a GR.
Footnotes:
[1] The NM-Committee is defined as:
- All members of DAM and FrontDesk.
- All application manager that are marked as active and
processed at least one NM in the last 6 months.
There is a mail alias <nm-committee@nm.debian.org> which reaches all
members, it is regularly regenerated by FrontDesk.
[2] At this point, frontdesk will ensure that the NM committee will not
be updated until after the case, to avoid a membership change in the
middle of an appeal process.
[3] This hopefully minimizes the risk of disclosing information that was
given to DAM in confidence. The appealer is not included as in some
situations it may be used to further harass the reporters.
[5] It involves keyring-maint and DSA, none of which we can or should
dictate timelines to. It is expected to be measured in days, not weeks.
--
bye, Joerg
Back to linux.debian.project | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Appeal procedure for DAM actions Joerg Jaspert <da-manager@debian.org> - 2019-01-07 23:40 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org> - 2019-01-08 00:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org> - 2019-01-08 11:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2019-01-08 12:30 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org> - 2019-01-08 12:40 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Jonathan Carter <jcc@debian.org> - 2019-01-08 13:10 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2019-01-08 16:20 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> - 2019-01-08 21:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Karsten Merker <merker@debian.org> - 2019-01-08 22:30 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Joerg Jaspert <da-manager@debian.org> - 2019-01-08 23:40 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2019-01-09 14:20 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Karsten Merker <merker@debian.org> - 2019-01-10 00:00 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2019-01-10 09:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2019-01-10 10:00 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Ulrike Uhlig <ulrike@debian.org> - 2019-01-10 15:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org> - 2019-01-11 00:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> - 2019-01-11 10:00 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> - 2019-01-09 02:10 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Ulrike Uhlig <ulrike@debian.org> - 2019-01-09 11:30 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 14:10 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Ulrike Uhlig <ulrike@debian.org> - 2019-01-10 15:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> - 2019-01-10 15:10 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org> - 2019-01-09 16:40 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2019-01-09 16:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Pierre-Elliott Bécue <becue@crans.org> - 2019-01-09 19:10 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Luke Faraone <lfaraone@debian.org> - 2019-01-09 19:30 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be> - 2019-01-09 19:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com> - 2019-01-10 14:00 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@debian.org> - 2019-01-09 19:50 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Joerg Jaspert <joerg@debian.org> - 2019-01-09 21:20 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.pro> - 2019-01-26 10:40 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> - 2019-01-26 17:20 +0100
Re: Appeal procedure for DAM actions Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.pro> - 2019-01-28 10:00 +0100
csiph-web