The reason I re-wrote is that I think the preliminary paragraphs are too...boring.  Not snappy enough.  I could re-write them if anyone agrees with me.

(sound of tumbleweeds blowing across empty streets...)

I also think that you must absolutely propose alternative questions for the ones you disagree with.  Not just "This is clearly biased" (many people will tell them that; and will be just as easily ignored), but also: "Here is our non-biased alternative, with added ET zip and zing!"

This must be done for each question, and therefore you may need to reduce the number of questions used as examples (if you wish to keep the letter a decent length (it's one page of A4 double-sided at the moment, I think.)

The part about the responses could be broken up into easier-to-see bullet points (I can do that do if you want.)

In my re-write, I missed out the part about Section G.  We say "It's superficial", they say, "No it isn't."  What is gained?  If it is, then examples of the superficiality need to be highlighted.

And always, always, offer alternatives.

Having said all that, I support you all 100% and admire the effort everyone has put in.

I don't think I would be the correct person to co-sign the document as it stands because it relies on a technical understanding of the issues I don't have, and a letter signed by "me too, (Mr. Thicko)" isn't any better than one that isn't--if quality is to beat quantity.

Ach, am I making no sense?  I'll shurrup.

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.