I did that. My public thread followed by a decision by Randy (not the moderators, not the TalkBoard, not any centralized committee) is a superior selection approach. It is fair, open, transparent and accountable. It is non-political, which I see as a huge advantage. Do you see this as a deficiency?

My proposal is not susceptible to accusations of secret favoritism, unless you believe that Randy plays favorites. (Do you?) IMHO, it will occupy less of Randy's time than the current proposal. I have addressed your only substantive objection to my proposal: the TOS question.

My proposed changes would take the TB (and the moderators) out of the loop, except in the same capacity as any other FT members. Is that change really so unpalatable? Is the point of having Ambassadors to recognize the members, or to empower the selection committee? What would I do without rhetorical questions?

It's pretty clear that the current proposal lacks critical mass, and I don't see any benefit to continuing to flog it. Why don't you try re-floating the current proposal with the modifications I suggested? You may still believe that it's second best, but perhaps it beats nothing at all.

If nothing happens, the ambassadors (lower case "a") who help us moderators will stay on the job and they won't blink an eye. Still, I'd be gratified to see them get official recognition. They have earned it.