Changes for page Contributor Processes

Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2026/02/08 08:29

From version 1.3
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2026/02/08 08:29
Change comment: Renamed back-links.
To version 1.1
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2026/01/20 20:44
Change comment: Imported from XAR

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -WebHome
1 +FactHarbor.Organisation.WebHome
Content
... ... @@ -1,12 +1,8 @@
1 1  = Contributor Processes =
2 -
3 3  == 1. Purpose ==
4 -
5 5  This page explains how contributors improve **the system that evaluates claims**, not the claims themselves.
6 6  **Key Principle**: AKEL makes content decisions. Contributors improve the algorithms, policies, and infrastructure that enable AKEL to make better decisions.
7 -
8 8  == 2. What Contributors Do ==
9 -
10 10  Contributors work on **system improvements**, not content review:
11 11  ✅ **Algorithm improvements**: Better evidence detection, improved source scoring, enhanced contradiction detection
12 12  ✅ **Policy proposals**: Risk tier definitions, domain-specific rules, moderation criteria
... ... @@ -13,9 +13,7 @@
13 13  ✅ **Infrastructure**: Performance optimization, scaling improvements, monitoring tools
14 14  ✅ **Documentation**: User guides, API docs, architecture documentation
15 15  ✅ **Testing**: A/B tests, regression tests, performance benchmarks
16 -
17 17  == 3. What Contributors Do NOT Do ==
18 -
19 19  ❌ **Review individual claims for correctness** - That's AKEL's job
20 20  ❌ **Override AKEL verdicts** - Fix the algorithm, not the output
21 21  ❌ **Manually adjust source scores** - Improve scoring rules systematically
... ... @@ -22,58 +22,39 @@
22 22  ❌ **Act as approval gates** - Defeats purpose of automation
23 23  ❌ **Make ad-hoc content decisions** - All content decisions must be algorithmic
24 24  **If you think AKEL made a mistake**: Don't fix that one case. Fix the algorithm so it handles all similar cases correctly.
25 -
26 26  == 4. Contributor Journey ==
27 -
28 28  === 4.1 Visitor ===
29 -
30 30  * Reads documentation
31 31  * Explores repositories
32 32  * May open issues reporting bugs or suggesting improvements
33 -
34 34  === 4.2 New Contributor ===
35 -
36 36  * First contributions: Documentation fixes, clarifications, minor improvements
37 37  * Learns: System architecture, RFC process, testing procedures
38 38  * Builds: Understanding of FactHarbor principles
39 -
40 40  === 4.3 Regular Contributor ===
41 -
42 42  * Contributes regularly to system improvements
43 43  * Follows project rules and RFC process
44 44  * Track record of quality contributions
45 -
46 46  === 4.4 Trusted Contributor ===
47 -
48 48  * Extensive track record of high-quality work
49 49  * Deep understanding of system architecture
50 50  * Can review others' contributions
51 51  * Participates in technical decisions
52 -
53 53  === 4.5 Maintainer ===
54 -
55 55  * Approves system changes within domain
56 56  * Technical Coordinator or designated by them
57 57  * Authority over specific system components
58 58  * Accountable for system performance in domain
59 -
60 60  === 4.6 Moderator (Separate Track) ===
61 -
62 62  * Handles AKEL-flagged escalations
63 63  * Focuses on abuse, manipulation, system gaming
64 64  * Proposes detection improvements
65 65  * Does NOT review content for correctness
66 -
67 67  == 4.7 Contributor Roles and Trust Levels ==
68 -
69 69  The following describes the different levels of contributors and their permissions:
70 -
71 71  == 1. Purpose ==
72 -
73 73  This page describes how people can participate in FactHarbor and how responsibilities grow with trust and experience.
74 -
75 75  == 2. Contributor Journey ==
76 -
77 77  1. **Visitor** – explores the platform, reads documentation, may raise questions.
78 78  2. **New Contributor** – submits first improvements (typo fixes, small clarifications, new issues).
79 79  3. **Contributor** – contributes regularly and follows project conventions.
... ... @@ -81,40 +81,28 @@
81 81  5. **Contributor** – reviews changes for correctness, neutrality, and process compliance.
82 82  6. **Moderator** – focuses on behaviour, tone, and conflict moderation.
83 83  7. **Trusted Contributor (optional)** – offers domain expertise without changing governance authority.
84 -
85 85  == 3. Principles ==
86 -
87 87  * Low barrier to entry for new contributors.
88 88  * Transparent criteria for gaining and losing responsibilities.
89 89  * Clear separation between content quality review and behavioural moderation.
90 90  * Documented processes for escalation and appeal.
91 -
92 92  == 4. Processes ==
93 -
94 94  Typical contributor processes include:
95 -
96 96  * proposal and review of documentation or code changes
97 97  * reporting and triaging issues or suspected errors
98 98  * moderation of discussions and conflict resolution
99 99  * onboarding support for new contributors.
100 100  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 -
102 102  == 5. System Improvement Workflow ==
103 -
104 104  === 5.1 Identify Issue ===
105 -
106 106  **Sources**:
107 -
108 108  * Performance metrics dashboard shows anomaly
109 109  * User feedback reveals pattern
110 110  * AKEL processing logs show systematic error
111 111  * Code review identifies technical debt
112 112  **Key**: Focus on PATTERNS, not individual cases.
113 -
114 114  === 5.2 Diagnose Root Cause ===
115 -
116 116  **Analysis methods**:
117 -
118 118  * Run experiments in test environment
119 119  * Analyze AKEL decision patterns
120 120  * Review algorithm parameters
... ... @@ -121,9 +121,7 @@
121 121  * Check training data quality
122 122  * Profile performance bottlenecks
123 123  **Output**: Clear understanding of systematic issue.
124 -
125 125  === 5.3 Propose Solution (RFC) ===
126 -
127 127  **Create Request for Comments (RFC)**:
128 128  **RFC Template**:
129 129  ```
... ... @@ -141,23 +141,17 @@
141 141  How will this be validated before full deployment?
142 142  ## Rollback Plan
143 143  If this doesn't work, how do we revert?
144 -```##
145 -
105 +```
146 146  === 5.4 Community Discussion ===
147 -
148 148  **RFC review period**: 7-appropriate time period (based on impact)
149 149  **Participants**:
150 -
151 151  * Other contributors comment
152 152  * Maintainers review for feasibility
153 153  * Technical Coordinator for architectural impact
154 154  * Governing Team for policy implications
155 155  **Goal**: Surface concerns, improve proposal, build consensus
156 -
157 157  === 5.5 Test & Validate ===
158 -
159 159  **Required before approval**:
160 -
161 161  * ✅ Deploy to test environment
162 162  * ✅ Run on historical data (regression test)
163 163  * ✅ Measure impact on key metrics
... ... @@ -168,11 +168,8 @@
168 168  * Doesn't break existing functionality
169 169  * Metrics improve or remain stable
170 170  * No unacceptable trade-offs
171 -
172 172  === 5.6 Review & Approval ===
173 -
174 174  **Review by**:
175 -
176 176  * **Technical changes**: Technical Coordinator (or designated Maintainer)
177 177  * **Policy changes**: Governing Team (consent-based decision)
178 178  * **Infrastructure**: Technical Coordinator
... ... @@ -182,11 +182,8 @@
182 182  * Test results positive
183 183  * No principled objections (for consent-based decisions)
184 184  * Aligns with FactHarbor principles
185 -
186 186  === 5.7 Deploy & Monitor ===
187 -
188 188  **Deployment strategy**:
189 -
190 190  * Gradual rollout (canary deployment)
191 191  * Monitor key metrics closely
192 192  * Ready to rollback if problems
... ... @@ -197,23 +197,16 @@
197 197  * No unexpected side effects
198 198  * User feedback positive
199 199  * System stability maintained
200 -
201 201  === 5.8 Evaluate & Iterate ===
202 -
203 203  **Post-deployment review**:
204 -
205 205  * Did metrics improve as expected?
206 206  * Any unexpected effects?
207 207  * What did we learn?
208 208  * What should we do differently next time?
209 209  **Document learnings**: Update RFC with actual outcomes.
210 -
211 211  == 6. Contribution Types in Detail ==
212 -
213 213  === 6.1 Algorithm Improvements ===
214 -
215 215  **Examples**:
216 -
217 217  * Better evidence extraction from web pages
218 218  * Improved source reliability scoring
219 219  * Enhanced contradiction detection
... ... @@ -221,11 +221,8 @@
221 221  * More accurate risk classification
222 222  **Process**: RFC → Test → Review → Deploy → Monitor
223 223  **Skills needed**: Python, ML/AI, data analysis, testing
224 -
225 225  === 6.2 Policy Proposals ===
226 -
227 227  **Examples**:
228 -
229 229  * Risk tier definition refinements
230 230  * New domain-specific guidelines
231 231  * Moderation criteria updates
... ... @@ -232,11 +232,8 @@
232 232  * Community behavior standards
233 233  **Process**: RFC → Community discussion → Governing Team consent → Deploy → Monitor
234 234  **Skills needed**: Domain knowledge, policy writing, ethics
235 -
236 236  === 6.3 Infrastructure Improvements ===
237 -
238 238  **Examples**:
239 -
240 240  * Database query optimization
241 241  * Caching strategy improvements
242 242  * Monitoring tool enhancements
... ... @@ -244,11 +244,8 @@
244 244  * Scaling improvements
245 245  **Process**: RFC → Test → Technical Coordinator review → Deploy → Monitor
246 246  **Skills needed**: DevOps, databases, system architecture, performance tuning
247 -
248 248  === 6.4 Documentation ===
249 -
250 250  **Examples**:
251 -
252 252  * User guides
253 253  * API documentation
254 254  * Architecture documentation
... ... @@ -256,23 +256,16 @@
256 256  * Tutorial videos
257 257  **Process**: Draft → Community feedback → Community Coordinator review → Publish
258 258  **Skills needed**: Technical writing, understanding of FactHarbor
259 -
260 260  == 7. Quality Standards ==
261 -
262 262  === 7.1 Code Quality ===
263 -
264 264  **Required**:
265 -
266 266  * ✅ Follows project coding standards
267 267  * ✅ Includes tests
268 268  * ✅ Documented (code comments + docs update)
269 269  * ✅ Passes CI/CD checks
270 270  * ✅ Reviewed by maintainer
271 -
272 272  === 7.2 Testing Requirements ===
273 -
274 274  **Algorithm changes**:
275 -
276 276  * Unit tests
277 277  * Integration tests
278 278  * Regression tests on historical data
... ... @@ -281,22 +281,15 @@
281 281  * Validation on test cases
282 282  * Impact analysis on existing claims
283 283  * Edge case coverage
284 -
285 285  === 7.3 Documentation Requirements ===
286 -
287 287  **All changes must include**:
288 -
289 289  * Updated architecture docs (if applicable)
290 290  * Updated API docs (if applicable)
291 291  * Migration guide (if breaking change)
292 292  * Changelog entry
293 -
294 294  == 8. Handling Disagreements ==
295 -
296 296  === 8.1 Technical Disagreements ===
297 -
298 298  **Process**:
299 -
300 300  1. Discuss in RFC comments
301 301  2. Present data/evidence
302 302  3. Consider trade-offs openly
... ... @@ -303,11 +303,8 @@
303 303  4. Technical Coordinator makes final decision (or escalates)
304 304  5. Document reasoning
305 305  **Principle**: Data and principles over opinions
306 -
307 307  === 8.2 Policy Disagreements ===
308 -
309 309  **Process**:
310 -
311 311  1. Discuss in RFC
312 312  2. Clarify principles at stake
313 313  3. Consider stakeholder impact
... ... @@ -314,21 +314,14 @@
314 314  4. Governing Team uses consent-based decision
315 315  5. Document reasoning
316 316  **Principle**: Consent-based (not consensus) - can you support this even if not perfect?
317 -
318 318  === 8.3 Escalation Path ===
319 -
320 320  **For unresolved issues**:
321 -
322 322  * Technical → Technical Coordinator → Governing Team
323 323  * Policy → Governing Team → General Assembly (if fundamental)
324 324  * Behavior → Moderator → Governance Steward → Governing Team
325 -
326 326  == 9. Behavior Standards ==
327 -
328 328  === 9.1 Expected Behavior ===
329 -
330 330  **Contributors are expected to**:
331 -
332 332  * ✅ Assume good faith
333 333  * ✅ Focus on system improvements, not personal opinions
334 334  * ✅ Support decisions once made (even if you disagreed)
... ... @@ -336,11 +336,8 @@
336 336  * ✅ Document your reasoning
337 337  * ✅ Test thoroughly before proposing
338 338  * ✅ Learn from mistakes
339 -
340 340  === 9.2 Unacceptable Behavior ===
341 -
342 342  **Will not be tolerated**:
343 -
344 344  * ❌ Personal attacks
345 345  * ❌ Harassment or discrimination
346 346  * ❌ Attempting to game the system
... ... @@ -347,21 +347,15 @@
347 347  * ❌ Circumventing the RFC process for significant changes
348 348  * ❌ Deploying untested changes to production
349 349  * ❌ Ignoring feedback without explanation
350 -
351 351  === 9.3 Enforcement ===
352 -
353 353  **Process**:
354 -
355 355  * First offense: Warning + coaching
356 356  * Second offense: Temporary suspension (duration based on severity)
357 357  * Third offense: Permanent ban
358 358  **Severe violations** (harassment, malicious code): Immediate ban
359 359  **Appeal**: To Governance Steward, then Governing Team
360 -
361 361  == 10. Recognition ==
362 -
363 363  **Contributors are recognized through**:
364 -
365 365  * Public acknowledgment in release notes
366 366  * Contribution statistics on profile
367 367  * Special badges for significant contributions
... ... @@ -371,11 +371,8 @@
371 371  * Payment (unless contracted separately)
372 372  * Automatic role promotions
373 373  * Special privileges in content decisions (there are none)
374 -
375 375  == 11. Getting Started ==
376 -
377 377  **New contributors should**:
378 -
379 379  1. Read this page + [[Organisational Model>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Organisational-Model]]
380 380  2. Join community forum
381 381  3. Review open issues labeled "good first issue"
... ... @@ -385,17 +385,14 @@
385 385  7. Participate in discussions
386 386  8. Build track record
387 387  **Resources**:
388 -
389 389  * Developer guide: [Coming soon]
390 390  * RFC template: [In repository]
391 391  * Community forum: [Link]
392 392  * Slack/Discord: [Link]
393 393  ---
394 -**Remember**: You improve the SYSTEM. AKEL improves the CONTENT.--
395 -
290 +**Remember**: You improve the SYSTEM. AKEL improves the CONTENT.
396 396  == 12. Related Pages ==
397 -
398 398  * [[Contributor Processes>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Contributor-Processes]] - Roles and trust levels
399 -* [[Governance>>Archive.FactHarbor 2026\.02\.08.Organisation.Governance.WebHome]] - Decision-making structure
293 +* [[Governance>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Governance.WebHome]] - Decision-making structure
400 400  * [[Organisational Model>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Organisational-Model]] - Team structure
401 401  * [[Decision Processes>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Decision-Processes]] - How decisions are made