"Upload and forget" leads to packages which are uploaded once and then abandoned. This then becomes a burden. While the Debian process is time consuming and arcane it does select for people who are prepared to commit to maintaining packages for the longer term.
That said, the Debian processes are over 20 years old. I find contributing to the FreeBSD ports and MacOS X homebrew package collections simpler, and without the same level of jumping through hoops. Homebrew's git-based submission, review and CI testing is simple to use. Likewise submitting a patch for the FreeBSD ports. Debian could do something similar, but its workflows predate this significantly. Were Debian to adopt a similar process, I think it would make the process significantly more transparent. The existing practice is still oriented around single individuals maintaining and uploading single packages (though it can also be done by groups with their own private version control for the package/group). The newer methods are significantly more open with much lower barrier to entry.
That said, the Debian processes are over 20 years old. I find contributing to the FreeBSD ports and MacOS X homebrew package collections simpler, and without the same level of jumping through hoops. Homebrew's git-based submission, review and CI testing is simple to use. Likewise submitting a patch for the FreeBSD ports. Debian could do something similar, but its workflows predate this significantly. Were Debian to adopt a similar process, I think it would make the process significantly more transparent. The existing practice is still oriented around single individuals maintaining and uploading single packages (though it can also be done by groups with their own private version control for the package/group). The newer methods are significantly more open with much lower barrier to entry.