The FAQ's of the two new Mikes

[New Democracy]

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

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -