`  Responding you your message, My knowledge of ``depute resolution`` is limited.  Also, my time line with pressing Real life matters, precludes me to immediately peruse this until end of this week (Saturday)  In the mean time, I hope there is AGF and the other parties are  ``reasonable`` and not try the ``game wikipedia``  (an aside, I am a Noob, but I learn fast and I am beginning to understand the nature of this beast,as well as the very colorful and well document history of one of the admins,on the out side ``blue water internet`` which I have been dealing with and which I have don't ``respect`` (sorry, The facts on this would seem speak and i can back that up to if you like) any rate, I am willing to debate, in a fair venue the issues I have, as long as the people, that have the power, don't do`` my way or high way`` thing, and follow consistent rules of augment  see Logical fallacy. Quite frankly, my experience I have had, so far on Wikipedia, have lived up the what many critics have said about Wikipedia on the blue water internet. Do a google on this phrase ``Critics of Wikipedia`` and see, I have.  My agenda is pretty simple and self evident, its to neutralize bias editing on the Roskam article, since I live there in the sixth district and have a stake in that election. (I only let the facts speak for them self as well as the rules of logical argument).  I will be well if the Roskam page is truly NPOV and Encyclopedic. Again, it would appear you to be the first ``non-bias``  admin pearson I have come across in my joruny in the land of wiki and with that I give you a .   Thanks`