To Arbitration Arbitrations - To Arbitration Training & Lessons
Back to Arbitration Team Meetings
Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-03-17
1 Preliminaries
- 1.1 Chair opens the Committee Meeting
1.2 Accept the Minutes of the last Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-02-17
Accept the Minutes of the last Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-03-02
2 Businesses - Important Note: Acceptance of Businesses 48 Hours before beginning of Arbitration Team Meeting latest!
2.1 How to handle the arbitration cases wiki added by Hans Verbeek
- Last year the arbitration wiki could be used by the arbitrator to store all relevant info. Since several month everything is almost completely anonymised, and as a result I have the impression that it is not usefull to me any more. Also the amount of data stored into the individual cases has grown to such an amount that it is almost impossible to find out what the status of an arbitration case is, except for the arbitrator that is handling this case.
2.2 What to do with inactive arbitrators, procedures added by AlexanderPrinsier
https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert-arbitration/2010-02/msg00048.html
- Summarize (u60)
first progress request to CM/A unanswered for 2 weeks -> forward info to DRO (thus doesn't affects answered progress report requests)
- DRO continues contacting CM/A for about 2 times 2 weeks
- so after 6 weeks replace of inactive CM and/or A becomes possible
- DRO can consider forwarding removal of Arbitrator status to board
- removal of Arbitrator status by board motion
- one we should add: DRO can delegate processing to another Arbitrator
- Summarize (u60)
2.3 Name change cases and the CPS added by UlrichSchroeter
Since Nov 8th, 2009 CPS is policy and therefor binding. Name changes affects certs and vvs. But not all certs maybe affected. See discussion on Training Lesson 30 - Name Changes and the CPS
2.4 Arbitration Backlog added by UlrichSchroeter
The Arbitration backlog becomes more and more a problem. Currently there are 47 (!!) unhandled cases, no CM, no A appointed yet and there are addtl 30 still open, running cases, in total 77 unhandled open cases (!!) So this Arbitration backlog needs instant attention by the Arbitration team, DRO and probably also by the board. Pending Arbitration Cases
2010-03-16 strawman proposal (and followups)
- 99% of Cebit cases doesn't fit into the precedence cases schema .. so all cases becomes individual cases
- "Looked up a few new cases. All seem straightforward: name change, switch names, typo in names. When we have one or two experienced arbitrators who provide backing info (yes, this was wrong, this is the correct name) it can be handled by Support"
2.5 Arbitration case a20090618.12 with precedense ? added by UlrichSchroeter
While the yet unpublished ruling on a20090618.12 takes a precedense. Its a seashift how to handle dutch name cases. The question here is when this ruling becomes published by request from Assurance Officer to implement it into the PracticeOnNames
- et cetera
3 Question Time - Important Note: Questions from CAcert.org Community Members can be added until beginning of Arbitration Team Meeting! As well questions can be asked at "Question Time", without added Question here
3.1 "Question One" added by YourName - Comment: Replace "Question One" by Your Question and add your Name
- et cetera
4 Closing
- 4.1 Confirm next Arbitration Team Meeting: Usually every 1st Tuesday and the 3rd Wednesday of the month, 20:00 UTC (19 CET).
- 4.2 Chair closes the Arbitration Team Meeting
- 4.3 Preparation of Minutes
Minutes - Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-03-17
- 20:00 - Chairs opened meeting
- Discussion about 5 topics, too much for one meeting, no concesus, following topic order
Minutes Arbitrations/Meetings/ATAgendaandMinutes-20100217 passed: 3 aye, 1 abstain
- Minutes meeting of 20100302 did not happen due to lack of attendees
- Topic 2.1 "How to handle the arbitration cases wiki"
- A: as it is now the wiki is of no help for me during an arbitration session
- B: ok, one note about anonymizing ... starting with transfer of cases from disputes channel into wiki
- first i've wrote all info from the case, then, more and more requests comes in to anonymize it
- A: Well, you have read my proposal: create a provate wiki, and store all data (including names, email addresses etc) in that private wiki. at a certain point during the arbitration we can copy SOME data to the public wiki, so the privacy of the users is secured
- C: having to keep 2 pages up to date increases our administrative overhead though
- D: Let's structure this: Why do we need all data in the Wiki, and why do we want to sanitize it?
- E: I think we should just make the whole arbitraiton case pages private.
- A: check, but as it is now I do'n dare to start an arbitration, as I have to keep a full private copy of each and any case, because the relevant data i smissing on the wiki
- D: Well, I used to provide a link to the Wiki in my emails to C and R. so when these pages become unavailable we'll need another form of communication
- A: you are free to keep the public part up-to-date (without privacy-related data)
- C: let's reverse, why keep a private page?
- D: However, I also prefer having all the data in one page
- C: I don't need such a page. I just have all the info in my mailbox, and the history of what happened on the public page
- D: I want a page that has a full history, not just for now, but also for later review. for instance when there is a dispute because of an arbitration. On the other hand, we need to show some kind of openness, to show the process is working.
- B: OTRS seems not to be usefull read casas mail in se
- D: Hmm, we seem to be suggesting technical solutions, I'd like to start with a discussion why we need data central or why we need public info available to all
- E: i dont think we necessarily need public data... but this also prevents users from getting an overview
- B: wiki is the public record over the case, emails contains the details ... some of the emails can be published, as long they don't contain privacy data
- D: Can we come up with a list of reasons why we need a central repository? And why we need public data?
B: audit, policy => references to open arbitration forum
- D: If we agree on my approach, can we then please first come up with reasons why we need everything in a central page? Then, when we all agree there are no more resons come up with reasons why we need a public overview? To pick up a running case (for instance because an arbitrator is not responding we need a central repository
- A: In order to start a new arbitration ALL data (including private data) has to be available. So a central storage would be nice. even to start a new case you need all relevant data. As I do not carry my mail archive with me I cannot start a new case, except when a new request is mailed.
- D: Ok, what reasons exist that require a public view on cases?
B: some of the privacy/public questions are answered by PD in case: https://wiki.cacert.org/Arbitrations/a20090328.1
- D: Correct, that's why I have to open them all...
- B: todo upto the next meetiing:
- findings on question: why public or why not
- find tools that can be used for arbitration reporting, documentation, central repository
- 4.1 Confirm next Arbitration Team Meeting: april 6th same time
- 21:04 Chair closed meeting
Synopsis of Meeting Contents
- Text
Meeting Transcript
Inputs & Thoughts
YYYYMMDD-YourName
Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please
YYYYMMDD-YourName
Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please