I propose...

[Cindy C.]

Necessary background . . . 

> Pip wrote:

> On the whole, I personally see FAQ as a semi-autonomous task 
>force, free to decide for itself how and by whom its work is 
>organised.

I mentioned in a rather vague way the reasons I felt I needed to be 
on MEG, but I need to flesh one thing out that is pertinent to what 
Pip and Tom wrote.

A few months back after I unsubbed from MEG, I asked a MEG friend 
how things were going.  The MEG replied that there was an idea to 
store MEG documents on the FAQ list, on the theory that all HPfGU 
documents should reside in one place because they're all 
documents.   (I think that was the idea; it has been a while).

I wasn't fond of the idea.  FAQ has no role in administering the 
list; we only cover the news, as they say.  We want the posts to be 
good, etc., but we don't edit administrative documents, I thought.  

I approached the two facilitators at the time (Amy and Joywitch) and 
advocated having FAQ be fully autonomous from MEG.  Amy initially 
took the position that FAQ was not autonomous -- that we had to 
comply with the HPfGU philosophy or some such.  I had to compose a 
second long message that re-articulated my position.  Joywitch 
concluded that the issue would probably not be important, but the 
FAQ list is "semi-autonomous."  I have no idea if those views were 
the result of MEG discussion, a MEG vote or something else.  I 
considered that to be the best I was going to do, so I let the 
matter rest.  

That is all I know.

> I nominate Cindy as our leader, 

Thanks, Tom, but I think I should defer.  Let's face it -- my 
leadership style freaks people out.  If a good idea pops into my 
head, I'll speak up, but it would be best for everyone if someone 
else took a turn at the helm.

Cindy