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
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature