Skip to Content

Changes for page Contributor Processes

Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2026/02/08 08:29
From version 1.2
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2026/02/08 08:28
Change comment: Update document after refactoring.
To version 1.3
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2026/02/08 08:29
Change comment: Renamed back-links.

Summary

Details

Page properties
Content
... ... @@ -1,8 +1,12 @@
1 1  = Contributor Processes =
2 +
2 2  == 1. Purpose ==
4 +
3 3  This page explains how contributors improve **the system that evaluates claims**, not the claims themselves.
4 4  **Key Principle**: AKEL makes content decisions. Contributors improve the algorithms, policies, and infrastructure that enable AKEL to make better decisions.
7 +
5 5  == 2. What Contributors Do ==
9 +
6 6  Contributors work on **system improvements**, not content review:
7 7  ✅ **Algorithm improvements**: Better evidence detection, improved source scoring, enhanced contradiction detection
8 8  ✅ **Policy proposals**: Risk tier definitions, domain-specific rules, moderation criteria
... ... @@ -9,7 +9,9 @@
9 9  ✅ **Infrastructure**: Performance optimization, scaling improvements, monitoring tools
10 10  ✅ **Documentation**: User guides, API docs, architecture documentation
11 11  ✅ **Testing**: A/B tests, regression tests, performance benchmarks
16 +
12 12  == 3. What Contributors Do NOT Do ==
18 +
13 13  ❌ **Review individual claims for correctness** - That's AKEL's job
14 14  ❌ **Override AKEL verdicts** - Fix the algorithm, not the output
15 15  ❌ **Manually adjust source scores** - Improve scoring rules systematically
... ... @@ -16,39 +16,58 @@
16 16  ❌ **Act as approval gates** - Defeats purpose of automation
17 17  ❌ **Make ad-hoc content decisions** - All content decisions must be algorithmic
18 18  **If you think AKEL made a mistake**: Don't fix that one case. Fix the algorithm so it handles all similar cases correctly.
25 +
19 19  == 4. Contributor Journey ==
27 +
20 20  === 4.1 Visitor ===
29 +
21 21  * Reads documentation
22 22  * Explores repositories
23 23  * May open issues reporting bugs or suggesting improvements
33 +
24 24  === 4.2 New Contributor ===
35 +
25 25  * First contributions: Documentation fixes, clarifications, minor improvements
26 26  * Learns: System architecture, RFC process, testing procedures
27 27  * Builds: Understanding of FactHarbor principles
39 +
28 28  === 4.3 Regular Contributor ===
41 +
29 29  * Contributes regularly to system improvements
30 30  * Follows project rules and RFC process
31 31  * Track record of quality contributions
45 +
32 32  === 4.4 Trusted Contributor ===
47 +
33 33  * Extensive track record of high-quality work
34 34  * Deep understanding of system architecture
35 35  * Can review others' contributions
36 36  * Participates in technical decisions
52 +
37 37  === 4.5 Maintainer ===
54 +
38 38  * Approves system changes within domain
39 39  * Technical Coordinator or designated by them
40 40  * Authority over specific system components
41 41  * Accountable for system performance in domain
59 +
42 42  === 4.6 Moderator (Separate Track) ===
61 +
43 43  * Handles AKEL-flagged escalations
44 44  * Focuses on abuse, manipulation, system gaming
45 45  * Proposes detection improvements
46 46  * Does NOT review content for correctness
66 +
47 47  == 4.7 Contributor Roles and Trust Levels ==
68 +
48 48  The following describes the different levels of contributors and their permissions:
70 +
49 49  == 1. Purpose ==
72 +
50 50  This page describes how people can participate in FactHarbor and how responsibilities grow with trust and experience.
74 +
51 51  == 2. Contributor Journey ==
76 +
52 52  1. **Visitor** – explores the platform, reads documentation, may raise questions.
53 53  2. **New Contributor** – submits first improvements (typo fixes, small clarifications, new issues).
54 54  3. **Contributor** – contributes regularly and follows project conventions.
... ... @@ -56,28 +56,40 @@
56 56  5. **Contributor** – reviews changes for correctness, neutrality, and process compliance.
57 57  6. **Moderator** – focuses on behaviour, tone, and conflict moderation.
58 58  7. **Trusted Contributor (optional)** – offers domain expertise without changing governance authority.
84 +
59 59  == 3. Principles ==
86 +
60 60  * Low barrier to entry for new contributors.
61 61  * Transparent criteria for gaining and losing responsibilities.
62 62  * Clear separation between content quality review and behavioural moderation.
63 63  * Documented processes for escalation and appeal.
91 +
64 64  == 4. Processes ==
93 +
65 65  Typical contributor processes include:
95 +
66 66  * proposal and review of documentation or code changes
67 67  * reporting and triaging issues or suspected errors
68 68  * moderation of discussions and conflict resolution
69 69  * onboarding support for new contributors.
70 70  Details of the process steps are aligned with the [[Open Source Model and Licensing>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Open Source Model and Licensing]] and [[Decision Processes>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Decision-Processes]] pages.
101 +
71 71  == 5. System Improvement Workflow ==
103 +
72 72  === 5.1 Identify Issue ===
105 +
73 73  **Sources**:
107 +
74 74  * Performance metrics dashboard shows anomaly
75 75  * User feedback reveals pattern
76 76  * AKEL processing logs show systematic error
77 77  * Code review identifies technical debt
78 78  **Key**: Focus on PATTERNS, not individual cases.
113 +
79 79  === 5.2 Diagnose Root Cause ===
115 +
80 80  **Analysis methods**:
117 +
81 81  * Run experiments in test environment
82 82  * Analyze AKEL decision patterns
83 83  * Review algorithm parameters
... ... @@ -84,7 +84,9 @@
84 84  * Check training data quality
85 85  * Profile performance bottlenecks
86 86  **Output**: Clear understanding of systematic issue.
124 +
87 87  === 5.3 Propose Solution (RFC) ===
126 +
88 88  **Create Request for Comments (RFC)**:
89 89  **RFC Template**:
90 90  ```
... ... @@ -102,17 +102,23 @@
102 102  How will this be validated before full deployment?
103 103  ## Rollback Plan
104 104  If this doesn't work, how do we revert?
105 -```
144 +```##
145 +
106 106  === 5.4 Community Discussion ===
147 +
107 107  **RFC review period**: 7-appropriate time period (based on impact)
108 108  **Participants**:
150 +
109 109  * Other contributors comment
110 110  * Maintainers review for feasibility
111 111  * Technical Coordinator for architectural impact
112 112  * Governing Team for policy implications
113 113  **Goal**: Surface concerns, improve proposal, build consensus
156 +
114 114  === 5.5 Test & Validate ===
158 +
115 115  **Required before approval**:
160 +
116 116  * ✅ Deploy to test environment
117 117  * ✅ Run on historical data (regression test)
118 118  * ✅ Measure impact on key metrics
... ... @@ -123,8 +123,11 @@
123 123  * Doesn't break existing functionality
124 124  * Metrics improve or remain stable
125 125  * No unacceptable trade-offs
171 +
126 126  === 5.6 Review & Approval ===
173 +
127 127  **Review by**:
175 +
128 128  * **Technical changes**: Technical Coordinator (or designated Maintainer)
129 129  * **Policy changes**: Governing Team (consent-based decision)
130 130  * **Infrastructure**: Technical Coordinator
... ... @@ -134,8 +134,11 @@
134 134  * Test results positive
135 135  * No principled objections (for consent-based decisions)
136 136  * Aligns with FactHarbor principles
185 +
137 137  === 5.7 Deploy & Monitor ===
187 +
138 138  **Deployment strategy**:
189 +
139 139  * Gradual rollout (canary deployment)
140 140  * Monitor key metrics closely
141 141  * Ready to rollback if problems
... ... @@ -146,16 +146,23 @@
146 146  * No unexpected side effects
147 147  * User feedback positive
148 148  * System stability maintained
200 +
149 149  === 5.8 Evaluate & Iterate ===
202 +
150 150  **Post-deployment review**:
204 +
151 151  * Did metrics improve as expected?
152 152  * Any unexpected effects?
153 153  * What did we learn?
154 154  * What should we do differently next time?
155 155  **Document learnings**: Update RFC with actual outcomes.
210 +
156 156  == 6. Contribution Types in Detail ==
212 +
157 157  === 6.1 Algorithm Improvements ===
214 +
158 158  **Examples**:
216 +
159 159  * Better evidence extraction from web pages
160 160  * Improved source reliability scoring
161 161  * Enhanced contradiction detection
... ... @@ -163,8 +163,11 @@
163 163  * More accurate risk classification
164 164  **Process**: RFC → Test → Review → Deploy → Monitor
165 165  **Skills needed**: Python, ML/AI, data analysis, testing
224 +
166 166  === 6.2 Policy Proposals ===
226 +
167 167  **Examples**:
228 +
168 168  * Risk tier definition refinements
169 169  * New domain-specific guidelines
170 170  * Moderation criteria updates
... ... @@ -171,8 +171,11 @@
171 171  * Community behavior standards
172 172  **Process**: RFC → Community discussion → Governing Team consent → Deploy → Monitor
173 173  **Skills needed**: Domain knowledge, policy writing, ethics
235 +
174 174  === 6.3 Infrastructure Improvements ===
237 +
175 175  **Examples**:
239 +
176 176  * Database query optimization
177 177  * Caching strategy improvements
178 178  * Monitoring tool enhancements
... ... @@ -180,8 +180,11 @@
180 180  * Scaling improvements
181 181  **Process**: RFC → Test → Technical Coordinator review → Deploy → Monitor
182 182  **Skills needed**: DevOps, databases, system architecture, performance tuning
247 +
183 183  === 6.4 Documentation ===
249 +
184 184  **Examples**:
251 +
185 185  * User guides
186 186  * API documentation
187 187  * Architecture documentation
... ... @@ -189,16 +189,23 @@
189 189  * Tutorial videos
190 190  **Process**: Draft → Community feedback → Community Coordinator review → Publish
191 191  **Skills needed**: Technical writing, understanding of FactHarbor
259 +
192 192  == 7. Quality Standards ==
261 +
193 193  === 7.1 Code Quality ===
263 +
194 194  **Required**:
265 +
195 195  * ✅ Follows project coding standards
196 196  * ✅ Includes tests
197 197  * ✅ Documented (code comments + docs update)
198 198  * ✅ Passes CI/CD checks
199 199  * ✅ Reviewed by maintainer
271 +
200 200  === 7.2 Testing Requirements ===
273 +
201 201  **Algorithm changes**:
275 +
202 202  * Unit tests
203 203  * Integration tests
204 204  * Regression tests on historical data
... ... @@ -207,15 +207,22 @@
207 207  * Validation on test cases
208 208  * Impact analysis on existing claims
209 209  * Edge case coverage
284 +
210 210  === 7.3 Documentation Requirements ===
286 +
211 211  **All changes must include**:
288 +
212 212  * Updated architecture docs (if applicable)
213 213  * Updated API docs (if applicable)
214 214  * Migration guide (if breaking change)
215 215  * Changelog entry
293 +
216 216  == 8. Handling Disagreements ==
295 +
217 217  === 8.1 Technical Disagreements ===
297 +
218 218  **Process**:
299 +
219 219  1. Discuss in RFC comments
220 220  2. Present data/evidence
221 221  3. Consider trade-offs openly
... ... @@ -222,8 +222,11 @@
222 222  4. Technical Coordinator makes final decision (or escalates)
223 223  5. Document reasoning
224 224  **Principle**: Data and principles over opinions
306 +
225 225  === 8.2 Policy Disagreements ===
308 +
226 226  **Process**:
310 +
227 227  1. Discuss in RFC
228 228  2. Clarify principles at stake
229 229  3. Consider stakeholder impact
... ... @@ -230,14 +230,21 @@
230 230  4. Governing Team uses consent-based decision
231 231  5. Document reasoning
232 232  **Principle**: Consent-based (not consensus) - can you support this even if not perfect?
317 +
233 233  === 8.3 Escalation Path ===
319 +
234 234  **For unresolved issues**:
321 +
235 235  * Technical → Technical Coordinator → Governing Team
236 236  * Policy → Governing Team → General Assembly (if fundamental)
237 237  * Behavior → Moderator → Governance Steward → Governing Team
325 +
238 238  == 9. Behavior Standards ==
327 +
239 239  === 9.1 Expected Behavior ===
329 +
240 240  **Contributors are expected to**:
331 +
241 241  * ✅ Assume good faith
242 242  * ✅ Focus on system improvements, not personal opinions
243 243  * ✅ Support decisions once made (even if you disagreed)
... ... @@ -245,8 +245,11 @@
245 245  * ✅ Document your reasoning
246 246  * ✅ Test thoroughly before proposing
247 247  * ✅ Learn from mistakes
339 +
248 248  === 9.2 Unacceptable Behavior ===
341 +
249 249  **Will not be tolerated**:
343 +
250 250  * ❌ Personal attacks
251 251  * ❌ Harassment or discrimination
252 252  * ❌ Attempting to game the system
... ... @@ -253,15 +253,21 @@
253 253  * ❌ Circumventing the RFC process for significant changes
254 254  * ❌ Deploying untested changes to production
255 255  * ❌ Ignoring feedback without explanation
350 +
256 256  === 9.3 Enforcement ===
352 +
257 257  **Process**:
354 +
258 258  * First offense: Warning + coaching
259 259  * Second offense: Temporary suspension (duration based on severity)
260 260  * Third offense: Permanent ban
261 261  **Severe violations** (harassment, malicious code): Immediate ban
262 262  **Appeal**: To Governance Steward, then Governing Team
360 +
263 263  == 10. Recognition ==
362 +
264 264  **Contributors are recognized through**:
364 +
265 265  * Public acknowledgment in release notes
266 266  * Contribution statistics on profile
267 267  * Special badges for significant contributions
... ... @@ -271,8 +271,11 @@
271 271  * Payment (unless contracted separately)
272 272  * Automatic role promotions
273 273  * Special privileges in content decisions (there are none)
374 +
274 274  == 11. Getting Started ==
376 +
275 275  **New contributors should**:
378 +
276 276  1. Read this page + [[Organisational Model>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Organisational-Model]]
277 277  2. Join community forum
278 278  3. Review open issues labeled "good first issue"
... ... @@ -282,14 +282,17 @@
282 282  7. Participate in discussions
283 283  8. Build track record
284 284  **Resources**:
388 +
285 285  * Developer guide: [Coming soon]
286 286  * RFC template: [In repository]
287 287  * Community forum: [Link]
288 288  * Slack/Discord: [Link]
289 289  ---
290 -**Remember**: You improve the SYSTEM. AKEL improves the CONTENT.
394 +**Remember**: You improve the SYSTEM. AKEL improves the CONTENT.--
395 +
291 291  == 12. Related Pages ==
397 +
292 292  * [[Contributor Processes>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Contributor-Processes]] - Roles and trust levels
293 -* [[Governance>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Governance.WebHome]] - Decision-making structure
399 +* [[Governance>>Archive.FactHarbor 2026\.02\.08.Organisation.Governance.WebHome]] - Decision-making structure
294 294  * [[Organisational Model>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Organisational-Model]] - Team structure
295 295  * [[Decision Processes>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Decision-Processes]] - How decisions are made