I know I am biased - show me someone who is not. It was not my intention to produce a document that pitched Conservatives against Liberals. I think that in general, people are biased towards conservatism already (such as "the Bible is the 'Word of God'"), so I do not need to reiterate those views. They are already well known. Besides, my focus, as I set out at the start before the body of "The Study" shows the limits of my investigation.
I hope that I presented reasons for arriving at my conclusions. Since readers will likely find the ideas challenging, I decided to cite parts of my sources, rather than simply provide the conclusions I drew from them. Hence the size of the documents.
Regarding the 1919 FDS (if there was one), do you think we would benefit if I started a thread asking people for information? The thought running through my mind is that Rutherford was a singularly autocratic domineering person, so I wonder if he would have run the operation by committee. That, I guess, coloured my expression at identifying who was "appointed" (as against "anointed").
If there was indeed a group in 1919 that collectively was the FDS, what happened with each individual? What consultation process did JFR indulge in? From my reading, their experience was just the opposite. He dreamt up the name "Jehovah's Witnesses" and imposed it. He authored the books.
Perhaps the question is: at what stage did the leadership transfer from a President to a Governing Body? And I don't think it happened during the reign of JFR.
As I asked, should I repeat these thoughts on identifying the people appointed in 1919 as a new thread?