Hello, I am with two colleagues FAQ author in the area of vehicle maintenance here at MT. Currently after restructuring the vehicle maintenance forum (new subforums still without FAQ author rights) or why always changes to “our” FAQ happen. The exact reason is not known to me, but also should not be the core of the discussion here. Because personally I was never a friend of the “MT-FAQ-software-solution”. One does not write at all IN the FAQ, but links existing forum- or blog-artik el in the FAQ and can edit it. If changes occur in the forum, for example, the article is moved or edited or even deleted by a moderator, this has a direct impact on the FAQ. Usually we do not get this at all, but at some point the question of a user comes up, what is going on with the FAQ, how currently happened. My idea was to create a separate MT blog (!), which serves as a storage location for the FAQ articles. So we authors find For example, a “FAQ worthy” article, copy it into this blog and link it to the FAQ. Or we write articles directly into the blog and use them in the FAQ. So the MT blog is not supposed to replace the FAQ but should serve as a storage location for the FAQ articles in the background. Blog authors = FAQ authors. Why have ??? Since the existence of an MT blog is currently linked to a user account, would be – if one of us did – this user ” This should not be the case. The user could turn his back on MT and the FAQ would be history. In addition, FAQ authors could be added, others (perhaps even the blog owner!) could go. That would not be clever. So after a long explanation now my question: could MT itself (i.e. a moderator or even administrator or whoever with sufficient rights) start such a blog, use the current FAQ authors as blog authors and we could use the blog use articles as a storage location for FAQ? And so regardless of the existence of individual existing FAQ authors, i.e. in MT-Hand? So it would be clearer, in my view better editable and we would be free from moving, deleting or other changes in the forum. This would not have any unwanted effects on the FAQ. Would this be possible? Just one question, please don’t start any activities yet! I just wanted to know it first before I started thinking about something, which maybe even is not possible or tolerated. Besides, we talk about this naturally in our FAQ-authors-round before and it does not grow on the crap of a single Thank you! Greetings, DiSchu