added some notes and cleaned up the first paragraph

COMMUNICATION.md

@@ -4,23 +4,22 @@
 
 OpenTelemetry has a [Code of
 Conduct](https://github.com/open-telemetry/community/blob/master/code-of-conduct.md)
-which primarily pertains to "bannable" offenses: things like harassment,
-personal attacks, and so on. Certainly OpenTelemetry does not tolerate any such
-behavior.
+where maintainers and community members pledge to foster welcoming and open
+community. Code of conduct gives examples of unacceptable behavior by
+participants like harassment, trolling or personal attacks which result in
+remove, edit, or reject any contributions to the project as well as declining
+participation in the project to individuals.
 
 And while we all deserve to collaborate without fear of overt harassment and
-personal attacks, that is a very low bar! This document is more aspirational and
-has fewer "teeth" (i.e., it's not about "banning" people), but it's also very
-important: it describes **how we wish to communicate with each other** and **how
-we aspire to create an environment that cultivates trust**, even in the face of
-inevitable technical and organizational disagreement.
+personal attacks, that is a very low bar! This document is aspirational, it
+describes **how we wish to communicate with each other** and **how we aspire to
+create an environment that cultivates trust**, even in the face of inevitable
+technical and organizational disagreements.
 
-Finally, this is **a living document** and should be adapted over time as the
-OpenTelemetry project evolves. At any time, there are certainly errors of
-omissions or even simple clarifications we can make to the wording here, and any
-and all are welcome to propose such changes.
-
-Now, without further ado:
+Finally, this is **a living document** and should adapted over time as the
+OpenTelemetry project evolves and we face new challenges. At any time, there are
+certainly errors of omissions or even simple clarifications we can make to the
+wording here, and any and all are welcome to propose such changes.
 
 ## Communication guidelines
 
@@ -38,17 +37,22 @@ with each other – both active community members as well as those who may just
 * **Be welcoming:** By nature, OpenTelemetry touches a lot of other projects and
   will thus have a larger-than-normal ratio of casual committers and passers-by.
   For this reason, it's especially important to be welcoming to newcomers. This
-  means thanking them for their interest and contributions, and being patient
-  with their initial misunderstandings. In fact, their points of confusion are a
-  valuable signal pointing towards documentation gaps.
+  means thanking people for their interest and contributions, and being patient
+  with misunderstandings, especially by newcomers. In fact, newcomers points of
+  confusion are a valuable signal pointing towards documentation gaps.
+* **Adjust your expectations** Not every part of the project has a maintainer
+  available for quick support or bug fix. For some people this project is a full
+  time job, for others is a weekend project. Don't get frustrated when you don't
+  get response fast as you expected, find the way to escalate your issue to the
+  right people's attention.
 * **Try to keep conversations in the open:** Where possible, try to have
   conversations in async formats like GitHub issues, PRs, and emails. If
-  resolution requires a call or videoconference, try to make a recording and
+  resolution requires a call or video conference, try to make a recording and
   notes available and discoverable to keep our community as accessible as
   possible across distant timezones.
 * **Strive for consensus, but don't require it:** Of course it's great when we
   can get everyone to agree. And certainly everyone should be – and should feel
-  – heard. As a rule of thumb, if there is a lone dissenter (or three) in any
+  heard. As a rule of thumb, if there is a lone dissenter (or three) in any
   given discussion, their points should be clearly addressed: not just with a
   simplistic "Sorry, I disagree," but with a principled counterargument.
   Finally, our formal process for escalation and decision-making is a matter of