gole ghashad in the wider herd, we don't have a wider herd, what do they do here, or for example , they say, let's say, let's say specialized issues , we refer them to a specialist expert, for example, let's say there is an issue , we go, we give it to a psychologist, for example, a doctor, we give an issue to an expert for example, housing should be recognized as an issue that is qualitative and not quantifiable, but the principle is obligatory or necessary, like good faith , like a thousand and one other examples. we give it to the specialist. we give it to the specialist do all the experts have the same opinion ? no, you break your ankle now. out of 10 doctors, 6 say he should operate, 4 say he shouldn't. what do we do when this happens ? the second principle here is that we tell the expert if there is a difference . it seems that we will put the majority as our basis. it is true that the majority criterion is everywhere. you think that in the same situation, all the members of the guardian council think the same way. they will never argue or convince or not convince. if they do not