An interesting batch of letters from readers in this edition of the Monday Morning Quarterback.

One reader says that while he admires President Reagan, he will vote for the Mondale-Ferraro ticket "for selfish financial reasons."

Another doesn't like the free-for-all style of the feature because, he feels, it allows people to make "off the wall" comments that go unchallenged.

Yet another reader says the idea of getting reader feedback is good, but that calling the feature MMQ is demeaning.

Here goes:

*"I thought the column Aug. 26 on the number of federal employes and retirees was interesting and I felt compelled to express my own feelings concerning the treatment of federal workers and the upcoming election.

"I am a long-time employe in the national security field and have been fortunate enough to observe both the president and vice president from a close proximity. They are both able and very likeable men and I agree with much they have done in the foreign policy and economic fields.

"I will not, however, vote for them this November. I am angry enough about the way federal employes have been targeted for verbal and financial abuse by this administration to put aside my opinions on certain issues and vote for the Democrats strictly for selfish financial reasons. We will not get a fair shake from Reagan in a second term. I wonder how many other federal workers and retirees will do the same?" R.W. in Alexandria.

*"I like the idea of the Monday Morning Quarterback for several reasons: but two that come to mind easily are: 1. It provides a channel for communication of the vast reservoir of information and ideas that is within the minds of the wasted and unappreciated human beings who are used by the government in our area; 2. It provides an outlet for the terrible frustrations of those of us who lead 'lives of quiet desperation,' making those lives a little less desperate. So I wish you and your idea well.

"But I do not like the name, Monday Morning Quarterback. It smacks of idle whining, of futile carping, of wallowing in trivia. Don't you think another light label that is not slightly demeaning would be better? How about 'The Listening Post', or 'Ear to the Ground,' or 'Blade in the Wind?'" Mac in Bowie.

*"After reading last week's comments by 'Boat Rocker in Bowie' about the uneven distribution of merit pay raises to supervisors I feel obligated to respond. I have argued for years that the performance of people in Grades 13 through 15 . . . should not be normally distributed. Consider the following:

"Employes who are only 'fully successful' in their jobs don't make it to the GS 13-15 level. It is the outstanding employe who is promoted.

"In those cases where an unsatisfactory or minimally successful employe may exist in those grades, it is even more important that management remove the non-responsive, unacceptable ones and train/counsel the minimally successful ones to bring them up to at least the fully successful level.

"The very nature of the merit pay system dictates that the distribution of raises will be truncated with disproportionately higher numbers of excellent and outstanding employes. If the distribution was truly 'normal,' management is not doing its job and has a bigger problem than it believes. Failure to recognize the above all too frequently leads management to annually mandate quotas (based on normal distribution) for 'outstanding' appraisals." Merit Pay manager from Vienna.

*"The letters . . . are interesting, however, they can be easily misunderstood. Each individual simply writes . . . his gripes and his interpretation of facts, and it is impossible to distinguish between those who have investigated their facts and figures and those who are off the wall.

"A way to turn a 'gripe column' into a true public service would be to include commentary by objective reporters validating or invalidating the writers' presentation. Without this the Monday Morning Quarterback is nothing more than a locker room gripe session and so is virtually useless. WCP, Reston.