• Arbitrations
• Meetings
• ATAgendaandMinutes-20100217

• To Arbitration Arbitrations - To Arbitration Training & Lessons

• Back to Arbitration Team Meetings

Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-02-17

• 1 Preliminaries

  • 1.1 Chair opens the Committee Meeting

  • 1.2 Accept the Minutes of the Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-01-20

  • 1.3 Accept the Minutes of the last Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-02-02

• 2 Businesses - Important Note: Acceptance of Businesses 48 Hours before beginning of Arbitration Team Meeting latest!

  • 2.1 Precedence Case a20100210.2 added by UlrichSchroeter

    • Arbitration case a20100210.2 adds a procedure for Support to handle simple name change / DoB correction requests from account holders and assurers (framework). Discussed before with 2 addtl. Arbitrators.

      1. quick check of cases after Fosdem
      2. check for every new dispute filing case with name change / DoB correction requests
      3. check on running cases

  • 2.2 SE special work cases added by UlrichSchroeter

    • Arbitration cases a20100128.1, a20100131.1, a20091119.1, a20100210.2, a20100108.1, a20090703.2

  • 2.3 How to handle the arbitration cases wiki added by Hans Verbeek

    • (2010.02.17 20:17 HansV: I don't have the key for the IRC channel, so I am not able to discuss. Please send me the key, so I can yoin you)

    • 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.
    • My proposal would be to split the wiki into a private work-in-progress part for the arbitrators (containing all relevant data, thus the full names and email addresses involved), and a public part (anonymized), which contains in simple sentences the flow of this case (some kind of readable abstract).

  • 2.4 ABC over CM / A ? added by Lambert Hofstrah

    • Discussion regarding background checks. As arbitrator you could get in contact with specific personal data. CAcert has a rule that people in specific roles need to go through a BC before being able to do the work. The question at hand is:Do we need that for Arbitrators? If so, who will do it (fellow arbitrators? Board?). Do we need to declare CoI's? If so, who to? Board? Secretary? Fellow Arbitrators? What about the Case Managers?
  • 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 2010-02-17

• 1.2: Minutes of the Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-01-20 accepted

• 1.3: Minutes of the last Arbitration Team Meeting 2010-02-02 accepted

• 2.1 Precedence Case a20100210.2
  • Summary:
    • ruling gives support a procedure to handle name change requests and DoB correction requests in a limited way
    • cases should be logged to the Post ruling notes list of case a20100210.2
    • adding a "marker" to the list of closed arbitration cases
    • Cases in the week after Fosdem should be reviewed by Case Managers / Arbitrators by a quick check, if the cases falling under the Precedence Case a20100210.2 ruling. Cases should be marked as checked against a20100210.2, if they match, dismiss the case, return to Support, otherwise leave it open. Volunteers: all CM's and A's
• 2.2 SE special work cases
  • Summary:
    • Arbitration team decides not take addtl. actions on this. SO has been informed. SO managed this. So nothing more to do on this. If SE in question does not agree, he can file a dispute.
• 2.3 How to handle the arbitration cases wiki
  • moved to next meeting (Hans hasn't found the way into the #arbteam channel, later on found note on wiki-page, email requests)
• 2.4 ABC over CM / A ?
  • Summary:
    • Why do we have the ABC?
      • Answer: To protect CAcert, make sure no one can inflict too much damage to CAcert on his own
      • According to policy, some functions need to go through ABC, like the SE's
      • There currently is a request for a ABC by someone in a role that's not mentioned
      • Question is: is this required? Is this the highest priority, or a nice to have?
      • What reasons support the request? Or: why would an Arbitrator need a ABC?
    • open discussions
    • can ABC helps persons become aware of CoI's? Then we might as well create a leaflet with examples, with the same effect?
• 4.1 next meeting will be 2010-03-02 (Tuesday), same time
  • 3 CM's/A's will not attend this meeting (Cebit and other schedules)
• 3 Question Time
  • no questions

Synopsis of Meeting Contents

• Text

Meeting Transcript

• Meeting Transcript 2010-02-17

Inputs & Thoughts

• YYYYMMDD-YourName

• Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please

• YYYYMMDD-YourName

• Text / Your Statements, thoughts and e-mail snippets, Please

• CategoryArbitration

• CategoryArbMeeting