Publish Dataset Disclaimer Text problematic for repositories whose liaisons review publication requests

[CCMumma]

Feature: https://guides.dataverse.org/en/6.10/installation/config.html#publishdatasetdisclaimertext

In the TDR multi-institutional Dataverse repository, our institutions choose from three levels of curation, described here: https://texasdigitallibrary.atlassian.net/wiki/x/E4CkJQ

Initially, we wanted to activate this Publish Dataset Disclaimer text for our users; however, our institutional liaisons who require liaison review prior to publication pointed out that they would have to click this attestation. Instead, they would prefer that the the attestation is clicked by the author when they request publication in institutions where this level of curation is required.

[bryanmgee]

This is related to #12325 (and viz that: IQSS/dataverse-pm#521). I think the core issue is that some people believe that if an institutional administrator has to check that box, that admin is "assuming" the same ethical burden, legal liability, etc. that the author is supposed to incur exclusively by checking that box.

One possible solution, which is employed by some other repositories, is to carry forward the 'checking' of the box by the depositor if the dataset is being accessed by an admin, either via the 'Submit for review' functionality or another means, which ensures the dataset can be edited and saved but does not require that admin to check the box themselves (depositors should probably still be required to check it for each new version, CC: IQSS/dataverse.harvard.edu#359). This would be best if an admin needs to be the one to formally publish the dataset.

In theory, another solution could be enhancing 'Submit for review' so that a dataset could be "greenlit" for publication by the admin but still returned to the depositor for them to actually click the button and check the box (would probably require a system lock to bar the depositor from making additional changes to metadata or files to avoid them reverting requested/required edits or adding content after being "greenlit", and/or to require them to resubmit it for review if they do want to make edits).

[pdurbin]

This is related to #12325

Yes, thanks for pointing that out @bryanmgee. On Monday @cmbz @sbarbosadataverse @scolapasta and I discussed the whole situation and left a comment there. I hope it makes sense! 😅