[Bug]: Overriding from DISABLE_ADDON to IGNORE isn't supported properly

[eviljeff]

What happened?

A takedown (e.g. AMO_DISABLE_ADDON) decision overridden with AMO_IGNORE doesn't send any email to the reporter or content owner when the content is restored. That the reporter doesn't get an email is probably okay; that the content owner doesn't is bad.

Explanation: In general we don't send any emails to the content owner for an Ignore action on the back of abuse reports. We treat overrides similarly to appeals, and an appeal resolution of Ignore was not assumed to be a valid scenario. For overrides, it is possible though.

What did you expect to happen?

I expected an email to go to the owner to tell them we changed our mind and restored the content we disabled.

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

┆Issue is synchronized with this Jira Task

[ioanarusiczki]

I verified this with Cinder dev queues with both sub-policies available

I get the same result as for disable plus override with Approve which has been tested. To summarize:

• at disable content is taken down and emails are sent to the reporter and developer (both the expected emails)
• then going to override with Developer feedback or Not enough information I'll get an email sent to the developer

• if a developer tries to send the appeal I get the expected message from [Task]: Store all decisions for a job #15151 (comment)

• also checked if the appeals are sent prior to an override attempt then there is no possibility to override from Cinder ✅

• I think there is a Cinder issue when it comes to policies in the Override menu, for example for an add-on there are sub-policies that would escalate to AMO, such as Closed user group from Content or both sub-policies from Privacy Policy. Checking different entities same's for ratings,I see Escalate with Escalate to AMO and Escalate to Legal. -> let me know if I should file a Lindie issue

example with the ratings:

[ioanarusiczki]

We've decided to leave this as it is (the last point from my comment above).