From 2aac8a5afcbc01634b4c6e3c815919df3fd25c49 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Ian Grigg <iang@cacert.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 10:33:31 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] p20110108 incorporated

git-svn-id: http://svn.cacert.org/CAcert/Policies@2171 14b1bab8-4ef6-0310-b690-991c95c89dfd
---
 DisputeResolutionPolicy.html | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

diff --git a/DisputeResolutionPolicy.html b/DisputeResolutionPolicy.html
index e4d3cda..4130059 100644
--- a/DisputeResolutionPolicy.html
+++ b/DisputeResolutionPolicy.html
@@ -30,6 +30,14 @@
         color : blue;
         text-decoration:line-through;
 }
+.draftadd {
+        color : darkblue;
+        font-weight: bold;
+}
+.draftdrop {
+        color : lightblue;
+        text-decoration:line-through;
+}
 -->
 </style>
 
@@ -45,18 +53,28 @@
         </big>
         This document is a <b>work-in-progress</b> to include future revisions only,<br />
         and is currently <b>only relevant for the [policy] group</b>.<br />
-        <span class="change">Additions in BLUE</span>  <span class="strike">strikes in BLUE</span> are suggestions for future voting in PG.<br />
-        <span class="change2">minor and routine tweaks are in steelblue</span>.<br />
+        Colour code:<ul>
+          <li> <span class="change">Additions in BLUE</span>  <span class="strike">strikes in BLUE</span> are suggestions for future voting in PG.</li>
+          <li> <span class="change2">minor and routine tweaks are in steelblue</span>.</li>
+          <li> DRAFT-approved <span class="draftadd">additions in darkblue</span> and <span class="draftdrop">subtractions in lightblue</span> are already approved by a policy group motion.</li>
+        </ul>
         </p>
     <a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer"><img style="float: right; border-width: 0" src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml11" alt="Valid XHTML 1.1" height="31" width="88" /></a>
+
      <ul>
+        <li>Iang: 20110129 <a href="//wiki.cacert.org/PolicyDecisions#p20110108">p20110108</a> approved,
+          <ul><li>incorporated new text as <span class="draftadd">darkblue</span> and dropped text as <span class="draftdrop">lightblue</span>,
+           <li> use of colours to meet PoP 5.3,</li>
+           <li> fixed some other references to Board as Appeal.  Proposed to incorporate these without further discussion.</li>
+           <li> Reviewed and changed the term CAcert to CAcert Inc. where clear.  Proposed to incorporate these without further discussion.</li>
+          </ul>
         <li>Iang: 20110117 Changed 3.4 title to match the intent of the paras more closely, in <span class="change">BLUE</span>.</li>
         <li>Iang: 20110112 Tuned text in <a href="#3.3">3.3</a> to reflect ultimate final &amp; binding status in 3.4.  Also swapped order of terms to more customary form. Shown in <span class="change">BLUE</span>.</li>
         <li>Iang: 20110107 <b>Added proposed text in <a href="#3.4">3.4</a> to switch the Appeal from the Board to a Panel within Arbitration.</b> Shown in <span class="change">BLUE</span>.  This change is substantive. </li>
         <li>Iang: Several changes to fix terms up:
         <ul>
           <li><span class="change2">20101229</span>: Completed <span class="change2">steelblue</span> changes from <i>Users</i> to <i>Members</i>.</li>
-          <li><span class="change2">20101215</span>: Added <span class="change2">steelblue</span>.  Term <i>Registered User Agreement</i> changed to CCA, as explained above. </li>
+          <li><span class="change2">20101215</span>: Added <span class="change2">steelblue</span>.  Term <i>Registered User Agreement</i> changed to CCA, as explained below. </li>
           <li> The historical background:  The change in terms (shown in <span class="change2">steelblue</span>) repair errors in production.  The DRP ran ahead of other documents especially CCA in its approval process.  Later on, in policy group, <a href="//wiki.cacert.org/PolicyDecisions#p20080106.1">we changed the term <i>User</i> to <i>Member</i></a>, at 11th hour in the approval process for CCA. </li>
          <li> <b> Therefore</b>, with addition of <a href="//wiki.cacert.org/PolicyDecisions#p20100306">p20100306</a>, this change is proposed by Policy Officer to be incorporated into next approved change without a vote on these changes in terms.  If anyone wants to put it to the vote, go ahead!  </li>
        </ul></li>
@@ -71,12 +89,14 @@
 <td>
   Name: DRP <a style="color: steelblue" href="//svn.cacert.org/CAcert/Policies/ControlledDocumentList.html">COD7</a><br />
   Status: POLICY <a style="color: steelblue" href="//wiki.cacert.org/wiki/TopMinutes-20070917">m20070919.3</a><br />
+  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;           <span class="draftadd">DRAFT p20110108</span> <br />
   &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;           <span class="change">WIP since 20101215</span> <br />
   Editor: <a style="color: steelblue" href="//wiki.cacert.org/TeusHagen">Teus Hagen
 </a><br />
    Licence: <a style="color: steelblue" href="//wiki.cacert.org/Policy#Licence" title="this document is Copyright &copy; CAcert Inc., licensed openly under CC-by-sa with all disputes resolved under DRP.  More at wiki.cacert.org/Policy" > CC-by-sa+DRP </a><br /></td>
 <td valign="top" align="right">
-  <a href="//www.cacert.org/policy/PolicyOnPolicy.php"><img src="images/cacert-policy.png" alt="TTP-Assist Status - DRAFT" height="31" width="88" style="border-style: none;" /></a>
+  <a href="//www.cacert.org/policy/PolicyOnPolicy.php"><img src="images/cacert-policy.png" alt="TTP-Assist Status - POLICY" height="31" width="88" style="border-style: none;" /></a><br />
+  <a href="//www.cacert.org/policy/PolicyOnPolicy.php"><img src="images/cacert-draft.png" alt="TTP-Assist Status - DRAFT" height="31" width="88" style="border-style: none;" /></a>
 
 </td>
 </tr>
@@ -223,9 +243,9 @@ closed with status "declined."
 </p>
 
 <p>
-Arbitrators are experienced Assurers of CAcert.
+Arbitrators are experienced Assurers <span class="strike">of CAcert</span>.
 They should be independent and impartial, including
-of CAcert itself where it becomes a party.
+of CAcert <span class="change">Inc.</span> itself where it becomes a party.
 </p>
 
 <h2 id="s2">  2. The Arbitration</h2>
@@ -234,13 +254,13 @@ of CAcert itself where it becomes a party.
 <h3 id="s2.1"> 2.1  Authority</h3>
 
 <p>
-The Board of CAcert and the 
+The Board of CAcert <span class="change">Inc.</span> and the 
 <span class="change2">
 Members of the Community
 </span>
  vest in Arbitrators
 full authority to hear disputes and deliver rulings
-which are binding on CAcert and the
+which are binding on CAcert <span class="change">Inc.</span> and the
 <span class="change2">
 Members.
 </span>
@@ -264,7 +284,7 @@ The Arbitrator conducts some preliminaries:
    agree, are under such jurisdiction, and it is deemed
    more appropriate.
    However, this is strictly limited to those parties,
-   and especially, CAcert and other parties
+   and especially, CAcert <span class="change">Inc.</span> and other parties
    remains under the governing law.
   </li><li>
    The Arbitrator reviews the Respondents and Claimants
@@ -381,7 +401,10 @@ to be considered carefully:
    </span>
     that were formed without
     a clause to seek arbitration in the forum;
-   <ul class="q"><li> Refer to issue of contracting out;  more certainty might be required on this point. </li></ul>
+   <ul class="q">
+     <li> Refer to issue of contracting out;  more certainty might be required on this point. </li>
+     <li> s/clause/intent/ ? </li>
+    </ul>
   </li><li>
     Areas where laws fall outside the Arbitration Act,
     such as privacy;
@@ -412,7 +435,8 @@ That is, as
    <span class="change2">
    Members
    </span>
-of CAcert, you agree to resolve
+<span class="strike">of CAcert</span>,
+you agree to resolve
 all disputes before CAcert's forum.
 This is sometimes called <i>private law</i>
 or <i>alternative dispute resolution</i>.
@@ -450,11 +474,11 @@ seek to have a case heard or to override a Ruling.
     for jurisdiction or other reasons.
     By way of example, if all Parties are
     <span class="change2">
-    Members of CAcert,
+    Members,
     </span>
     then jurisdiction more normally falls within the forum.
     If the Arbitrator rules to reject,
-    he should do so only after consulting with CAcert counsel.
+    he should do so only after consulting with CAcert <span class="change">Inc.</span> counsel.
     The Arbitrator's jurisidiction is ordinarily that of
     dealing with the order, and
     not that which the external court has claimed to.
@@ -471,7 +495,7 @@ The Arbitrator follows the procedure:
 <ol><li>
     Establish the facts.
     The Arbitrator collects the evidence from the parties.
-    The Arbitrator may order CAcert or
+    The Arbitrator may order CAcert <span class="change">Inc.</span> or
    <span class="change2">
    Members
    </span>
@@ -553,9 +577,9 @@ in a timely manner
 
 <p>
 The Ruling is
-<span class="change">ordinarily final and binding</span>
-<span class="strike">binding and final</span>
-on CAcert and all
+<span class="draftadd">ordinarily final and binding</span>
+<span class="draftdrop">binding and final</span>
+on CAcert <span class="change">Inc.</span> and all
    <span class="change2">
    Members
    </span>
@@ -584,15 +608,15 @@ but the Ruling must be presented in filing any dispute
 in another forum such as the person's local courts.
 </p>
 
-<h3 id="s3.4"> 3.4  <span class="change">Review for Appeal</span> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;    <span class="strike">Re-opening the Case or Appeal</span> </h3>
+<h3 id="s3.4"> 3.4  <span class="draftadd">Review for Appeal</span> &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;    <span class="draftdrop">Re-opening the Case or Appeal</span> </h3>
 
 <p>
-In the <span class="change">event</span> <span class="strike">case</span> of clear injustices, egregious behaviour or
+In the <span class="draftadd">event</span> <span class="draftdrop">case</span> of clear injustices, egregious behaviour or
 unconscionable Rulings,
-<span class="change">
+<span class="draftadd">
 a review may be requested by filing a dispute.
 </span>
-<span class="strike">
+<span class="draftdrop">
 parties may seek to re-open the
 case by filing a dispute.
 </span>
@@ -602,7 +626,7 @@ whether the case may be re-opened or not.
 </p>
 
 <p>
-<span class="change">
+<span class="draftadd">
 If the Review Arbitrator rules the case be re-opened,
 then the Review Arbitrator refers the case to an Appeal Panel of 3.
 The Appeal Panel is led by a Senior Arbitrator,
@@ -610,7 +634,7 @@ and is formed according to procedures established
 by the DRO from time to time.
 The Appeal Panel hears the case and delivers a final and binding Ruling.
 </span>
-<span class="strike">
+<span class="draftdrop">
 If the new Arbitrator rules the case be re-opened,
 then it is referred to the Board of CAcert Inc.
 The Board hears the case and delivers a final
@@ -634,8 +658,11 @@ constitute an intentional or grossly negligent breach of duty.
 
 <p>
 The above provisions may only be overridden by
-appeal process (by means of a new dispute causing
+appeal process.
+<span class="draftdrop">
+(by means of a new dispute causing
 referral to the Board).
+</span>
 </p>
 
 <h3 id="s3.6"> 3.6  Remedies </h3>
@@ -690,7 +717,7 @@ He may rule and instruct any of the parties on these issues.
 The Arbitrator is not limited within the general domain
 of CAcert, and may instruct novel remedies as seen fit.
 Novel remedies outside the domain may be routinely
-confirmed by the Board by way of appeals process,
+confirmed <span class="draftdrop"> by the Board</span> by way of appeal process,
 in order to establish precedent.
 </p>
 
@@ -743,7 +770,7 @@ Some disadvantages exist.
 <ul><li>
      <span class="change2">Members</span> may have their rights trampled over.
      In such a case, the community should strive to
-     re-open the case and refer it to the board.
+     re-open the case <span class="draftdrop">and refer it to the board<span>.
   </li><li>
      <span class="change2">Members</span> may feel overwhelmed by the formality
      of the process.