Although, if we do that, we're going to need meta-notation to distinguish between styles proposed, under consideration, accepted and rejected. [Chalks] That's why we need a committee, of course; if you start doing this sort of thing properly it's bound to turn out to be more complicated than one head can contain.

I nominate Chalky to be on the ad hoc search committee charged with finding a steering committee to oversee the establishment of a notation game.

But surely we need to agree on the nomination procedures first?

[rab] Agreed, as long as we don't make things needlessly bureaucratic.

OK then, so I suggest the usual: each candidate will need the backing of twenty (20) signatures. In the event of more than one nomination, we'll need to instigate an election process. Obviously, the most sensible way to do this is a two-round procedure, where we use a single-transferrable vote to whittle down to two candidates, and a second round to decide the final victor. We will of course need to do this for each committee post, but it's a pretty straightforward procedure, so won't be much hassle to implement.