Correct. I'm reluctantly beginning to conclude that having a formal Ambassador designation is going to be much more trouble than it's worth to FT. Centralized selection = trouble.

You want simple? I'll give you simple. Let each Moderator choose any number of assistants, subject to Randy's OK. The assistants get a title of some sort and agree to help identify problem posts and proactively help new users. Pretty much like several people already do in the active forums. The moderators know who the helpers are.

Some of those helpers are opinionated and outspoken enough to have violated the TOS now and then. I personally don't have a problem with that, especially if the violations are not recent. In fact, as you mentioned, people who have erred in the past are in an excellent position to explain how they changed. There are often the most passionate posters who have the time and energy to help, and moderators know better than anyone how great it can be to channel that energy postively.

Just leave assistant selection with the moderators. If anyone here is concerned that he or she might be unfairly blackballed by all the moderators, I can assure you that moderators don't all agree on much of anything. Just like any other group of FT members. With decentralized selection of assistants and no pre-set limit on their number, anyone wanting such an opportunity should be able to find one in a quiet corner of FT. Working as an assistant, even in a quiet forum, is great practice for being a better contributor. You'll get accustomed to the friendliness of the smaller forums and carry that attitude all over FT.

The formal title has two advantages: it lets newbies know where to turn in addition to the moderators, and it feeds the ego of the assistant. (Many FTers are status junkies, whether we admit it to ourselves or not.) I would like my helpers to get a title, but not if the price of this is the creation of another focal point for resentments and politicking.