added comments from Hans, Gero

git-svn-id: http://svn.cacert.org/CAcert/Policies@2139 14b1bab8-4ef6-0310-b690-991c95c89dfd

Agreements/CAcertCommunityAgreement.html

@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@
   Name: CCA <a style="color: steelblue" href="https://svn.cacert.org/CAcert/Policies/ControlledDocumentList.html">COD9</a><br />
   Status: POLICY <a style="color: steelblue" href="https://wiki.cacert.org/PolicyDecisions#p20080109">p20080109</a><br />
 -------- with WIP <a style="color: steelblue" href="https://wiki.cacert.org/PolicyDecisions#p201010xx">p201010xx</a> in BLUE <br />
-Editor: Iang<br />
+Editor: <a style="color: steelblue" href="//wiki.cacert.org/Iang">Iang</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>
@@ -473,7 +473,16 @@ However, some information will continue to
 be held for certificate processing purposes.
 </p>
 
-<ul class="q"><li> Consider a change to the termination clause to make Arbitration + Support's job more easy?</li></ul>
+<ul class="q">
+  <li> Iang: Consider a change to the termination clause to make Arbitration + Support's job more easy?</li>
+  <li> Hans suggests:  We should remove the implementation details from this section, but keep the rules intact:
+    <ul>
+     <li> E.g. by creating a new manual page, describing what to do in case of termination.  In that way we remove the implementation details ('write to the online support forum, file dispute to resign') from the CCA. </li>
+      <li> New Proposal: </li>
+      <li> <u> "3.3 Termination <br />You may terminate this agreement by resigning from CAcert, see 'Termination Howto'. All services will be terminated, and your certificates will be revoked. However, some information will continue to be held for certificate processing purposes."</u> </li>
+     </ul>
+    </li>
+</ul>
 
 <p>
 The provisions on Arbitration survive any termination
@@ -498,7 +507,7 @@ by the Community.
 Changes will be notified to you by email to your primary address.
 </p>
 
-<ul class="q"><li> We've not been able to do this easily.  Change?</li></ul>
+<ul class="q"><li> Iang: We've not been able to do this easily.  Change?  Drop last sentance above?</li></ul>
 
 <p>
 If you do not agree to the changes, you may terminate as above.
@@ -550,10 +559,19 @@ mirror and reinforce these terms.
   <li> It was not intended to cover all contracts formed by (for example) the Board.</li>
   <li> Since then, the RDL has been approved to DRAFT, and this clause may need re-writing.</li>
   <li> Clarify?</li>
+  <li> Hans:  delete last sentance?</li>
+  <li> Gero:  I wonder whether this is related to the purpose of the agreement
+and think nowadays it is somewhat misplaced here. Simply drop it??</li>
 </ul>
 
 <h4 id="s4.2"> 4.2  References and Other Binding Documents </h4>
 
+<ul class="q">
+   <li> Gero:  prefer to move this section to 0.2, and merge in 0.1.6,8,14,15 definitions.</li>
+   <li> Gero:  prefer (see DRP) rather than (DRP => COD7)</li>
+   <li> Gero:  preserve of PoP is more confusing than helpful </li>
+</ul>
+
 <p class="strike">
 This agreement is CAcert Official Document 9 (COD9)
 and is a controlled document.