@imp, these are changes that attempt to address your feedback. There are two places where I think I captured your sentiment, but proposed some tweaks.

1. Saying "conduct that damages developer relations" might be too broad.

Maybe we can be more specific by deferring to the authoritative document:

A commit bit may be suspended or revoked in response to a policy violation, link:{../code-of-conduct}[a conduct violation], or actions that put the integrity of a repository at risk.

2. The core team generally avoids second-guessing the delegated teams when established due process has been followed, and the decisions do not appear arbitrary.

I agree with this message, but I'm concerned with using "due process" when it's not clearly established (yet). I intentionally described these as "guidelines" to imply that the various teams have agency. How about something like this that, I think, says something similar, but backs off "due process" until that's clearly established.

However, the core team generally avoids second-guessing teams that have followed these guidelines.

• Link to commit bit expiration policy
• Tweak some wording

• Link to the main Policy Document at https://www.freebsd.org/internal/policies/
• More wording tweaks