Dear Election Methods List I say Saari is correct - the parts of a FAQ should be built one brick at a time and we should be sure that each brick meets the approval of a conclusive majority (2:1) of the persons who are involved in the activity - no package deals - no taking the bad with the good - no pig in a poke. The point of this letter is that I would like to see the two new Mikes go forward with this project. I feel that I will lean something. So - Mike and Mike - this is what you should do: Annouce to this list that you are constructing a FAQ for YOURSELVES and that everyone is invited to join in. Because you are not claiming to be forming "The Official FAQ" for this list means that you can have any rules you wish. If you do a good job of establishing the rules then people will join in. This list is big enough to have several discussions going on at one time. Everyone can pick which discussions they want to read and take part in. Rob is not a control freak - he encouraged Steve to have his own FAQ discussions - you can do the same - you two new Mikes can hold discussions about your new FAQ. The question of a final vote on each FAQ is debatable - there are arguments on both sidess of the question - but I would like to see the policy of no final vote tried. The policy would be tested in this project. Note: I have been on this list for more than a year and not once was there any votes taken on any FAQ's - official or otherwise. I have been unaware that this list had a FAQ - I suspect that it is something that was imposed by the usual politics of politicians. I would like to try a policy that is not the usual politics. Sincerely, Donald Eric Davison of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -