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