NDA-breach penalty lengths


In this post about Alex Shih the WMF extended their 2-year prohibition on NDA-critical userrights to indefinite. In this post about Bbb23 a similar sanction was stated to be "permanent".

Can I check if you are using these terms in the same way the local communities does (that is, indefinite means it can end at some future stage, which requires a process for that), or if they're intended to be synonymous? Nosebagbear (talk) 15:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nosebagbear, thanks for asking this. In our usage for these cases, "indefinite" and "permanent" are synonymous - both mean "without end and non-appealable." We do not currently have a process for appeal of decisions like these. WMFOffice (talk) 16:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
Is it subject to review by Case Review Committee?--GZWDer (talk) 18:21, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, this question was sent my way. These cases wouldn't be subject to CRC review because removing access to information that requires an NDA isn't part of the Office actions policy. NDA access rights changes are based on the NDA itself (usually based on evidence of a violation of the agreement that is reported to the Foundation or based on the recommendation of a community body that such a violation occurred). -Jrogers (WMF) (talk) 16:25, 24 August 2020 (UTC)