Dear Louis Black, I read your column last week, and I am familiar with your awkward form of writing (which I only realized after you pointed that out, but your ideas are usually interesting) [“Page Two,” May 12]. I've been working a lot of overtime for the IRS lately, opening mail and sorting forms and correspondence, and this schedule pretty much keeps me away from reading the Chronicle. During this peak period of time for the forms coming in, 14-hour workdays this year, uh, it's hard to read the Chronicle, or anything much, for me, lately, and this has been happening for me since 2002. Anyway, to the point: I don't know much about the local politics lately, havin' not read much for the past coupla months. A local roller girl gave me a Mike Martinez poster, which I put up outside my house. Then I read something, like he will bike to work if he gets elected to council, and this sounds good. Less traffic for me! Sometimes I bike, too; I would prefer that. But to the main point here, the propositions ... I read your recent column, seems like everyone is for those props; they have good names, like the Orwellesque names the Bush administration uses, which usually, or always do about the opposite of what they sound like. While this may not be the intention/motivation of these local folks, anyway, you and Michael King seem to agree that these props are badly written, so badly that we should vote them down. Well, that has been my policy, as far as I remember back, to vote "no,” like on all 21 propositions. Yet, my main point here is that, how about you and your fellow writers write up what you would consider a good proposition, or propositions, and present them side by side with the ones we are voting on and print them like that in the Chronicle. Now that would be something we could really compare and discuss. You think I'm right?