From 61d644beda56c3bb0fb5dc5be7447aa67dc4d7de Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Vincent Breitmoser <look@my.amazin.horse>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 15:27:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] about: reorder FAQ entries a bit

---
 dist/templates/about/faq.html.hbs | 96 ++++++++++++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)

diff --git a/dist/templates/about/faq.html.hbs b/dist/templates/about/faq.html.hbs
index dbaf0b0..1d7fd9f 100644
--- a/dist/templates/about/faq.html.hbs
+++ b/dist/templates/about/faq.html.hbs
@@ -2,13 +2,46 @@
 <div class="about">
     <center><h2><a href="/about">About</a> | <a href="/about/news">News</a> | <a href="/about/usage">Usage</a> | FAQ | <a href="/about/stats">Stats</a> | <a href="/about/privacy">Privacy</a></h2></center>
 
-    <h3 id="no-sign-verified"><a href="#no-sign-verified">Why not sign keys
-            after verification?</a></h3>
+    <h3 id="sks-pool"><a href="#sks-pool">Is this server part of the "SKS" pool?</a></h3>
 
-    The <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span> service is meant for key
-    distribution and discovery, not as a de-facto CA.  Client implementations
-    that want to offer verified communication should rely on their own trust
-    model.
+    <p>
+        No. The federation model of the SKS pool has various problems in terms
+        of reliability, abuse-resistance, privacy, and usability. We might do
+        something similar to it, but <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span>
+        will never be part of the SKS pool itself.
+    </p>
+
+    <h3 id="federation"><a href="#federation">Is keys.openpgp.org federated? Can I help by running an instance?</a></h3>
+
+    <p>
+        For the moment, no.
+        We do plan to decentralize <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span>
+        at some point.
+        With multiple servers
+        run by independent operators,
+        we can hopefully improve the reliability
+        of this service even further.
+    </p>
+
+    <p>
+        Several folks offered to help out
+        by "running a Hagrid server instance".
+        We very much appreciate the offer,
+        but we will probably never have an "open" federation model like SKS,
+        where everyone can run an instance and become part of a "pool".
+        This is for two reasons:
+    </p>
+    <ol>
+        <li>
+            Federation with open participation requires all data to be public.
+            This significantly impacts the privacy of our users, because it
+            allows anyone to scrape a list of all e-mail addresses.
+        </li>
+        <li>
+            Servers run as a hobby by casual administrators do not meet our
+            standards for reliability and performance.
+        </li>
+    </ol>
 
     <h3 id="non-email-uids"><a href="#non-email-uids">Why is there no support
             for identities that aren't e-mail addresses?</a></h3>
@@ -68,6 +101,16 @@
         on a solution.
     </p>
 
+    <h3 id="no-sign-verified"><a href="#no-sign-verified">Why not sign keys
+            after verification?</a></h3>
+
+    <p>
+        The <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span> service is meant for key
+        distribution and discovery, not as a de-facto CA.  Client implementations
+        that want to offer verified communication should rely on their own trust
+        model.
+    </p>
+
     <h3 id="revoked-uids"><a href="#revoked-uids">Why are revoked identities not
             distributed as such?</a></h3>
 
@@ -118,47 +161,6 @@
             upload keys that can only sign.</li>
     </ol>
 
-    <h3 id="sks-pool"><a href="#sks-pool">Is this server part of the "SKS" pool?</a></h3>
-
-    <p>
-        No. The federation model of the SKS pool has various problems in terms
-        of reliability, abuse-resistance, privacy, and usability. We might do
-        something similar to it, but <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span>
-        will never be part of the SKS pool itself.
-    </p>
-
-    <h3 id="federation"><a href="#federation">Is keys.openpgp.org federated? Can I help by running an instance?</a></h3>
-
-    <p>
-        For the moment, no.
-        We do plan to decentralize <span class="brand">keys.openpgp.org</span>
-        at some point.
-        With multiple servers
-        run by independent operators,
-        we can further improve the reliability
-        of this service.
-    </p>
-
-    <p>
-        Several folks offered to help out
-        by "running a Hagrid server instance".
-        We very much appreciate the offer,
-        but we will probably never have an "open" federation model like SKS,
-        where everyone can run an instance and become part of a "pool".
-        This is for two reasons:
-    </p>
-    <ol>
-        <li>
-            Federation with open participation requires all data to be public.
-            This significantly impacts the privacy of our users, because it
-            allows anyone to scrape a list of all e-mail addresses.
-        </li>
-        <li>
-            Servers run as a hobby by casual administrators do not meet our
-            standards for reliability and performance.
-        </li>
-    </ol>
-
     <h3 id="older-gnupg"><a href="#older-gnupg">
       I have trouble updating some keys with GnuPG.  Is there a bug?
     </a></h3>