-For clusters with an odd node count we discourage the use of QDevices
-currently. The reason for this, is the difference of the votes the QDevice
-provides for each cluster type. Even numbered clusters get single additional
-vote, with this we can only increase availability, i.e. if the QDevice
-itself fails we are in the same situation as with no QDevice at all.
-
-Now, with an odd numbered cluster size the QDevice provides '(N-1)' votes --
-where 'N' corresponds to the cluster node count. This difference makes
-sense, if we had only one additional vote the cluster can get into a split
-brain situation.
-This algorithm would allow that all nodes but one (and naturally the
-QDevice itself) could fail.
-There are two drawbacks with this:
+For clusters with an odd node count, we currently discourage the use of
+QDevices. The reason for this is the difference in the votes which the QDevice
+provides for each cluster type. Even numbered clusters get a single additional
+vote, which only increases availability, because if the QDevice
+itself fails, you are in the same position as with no QDevice at all.
+
+On the other hand, with an odd numbered cluster size, the QDevice provides
+'(N-1)' votes -- where 'N' corresponds to the cluster node count. This
+alternative behavior makes sense; if it had only one additional vote, the
+cluster could get into a split-brain situation. This algorithm allows for all
+nodes but one (and naturally the QDevice itself) to fail. However, there are two
+drawbacks to this: