Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Simultaneous Aural Communication


Weldon Merritt

Recommended Posts

Now, it seems, we come to it. The use of deaf meetings as an example is really a stalking horse to justify chat room meetings! In fact, the use of the term "aural" was adopted precisely to avoid any possible interpretation that chat rooms would be acceptably termed deliberative assemblies. So it seems we were very wise to use it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now, it seems, we come to it. The use of deaf meetings as an example is really a stalking horse to justify chat room meetings! In fact, the use of the term "aural" was adopted precisely to avoid any possible interpretation that chat rooms would be acceptably termed deliberative assemblies. So it seems we were very wise to use it!

Oh, there was never any doubt in my mind what the intent was. Indeed, all of the other non-aural means of communication listed as examples could have been excluded just as effectively by simply requiring “simultaneous communication” without specifying “aural.” But I do not feel a need to "justify chat room meetings"; some of us have been conducting them for quite some time now, using RONR with a number of special rules of order to fit our unique circumstances. I suspect we will continue to do so whether or not RONR considers chat room meetings to be deliberative assemblies (and I agree that with the current wording, it does not).

The question is: Why is the aural component of communication considered important only for meetings that are not conducted "in a single room or area"? The need for simultaneous communication seems reasonably obvious, at least to me; the need for that communication to be aural is not. Yes, I know that the reason for a rule (at least one that is unambiguous) is irrelevant; the rule is what it is. But one can still wonder and seek to understand what it is about chat room meetings, which clearly can be conducted with simultaneous (but non-aural) communication, makes the authors believe they are not true deliberative assemblies. Having participated in both teleconference and chat room meetings, it has been my experience that once you have more than just a very small number of participants, it is much easier (albeit very much slower) to keep track of what is going on in a chat room. If there is indeed a rational reason for excluding chat room meetings from being considered deliberative assemblies (not just “we don’t like them”), I would love to know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be very glad to participate in a panel discussion/debate on the topic. But -- just as Mr. Merritt concedes that chat rooms are "very much slower" -- so also is this forum (which, perhaps, some might validly describe as a chat room). And some (not all) of the very reasons why a chat room is poor substitute for a deliberative assembly apply to debates/discussions here-- which is why I decline the challenge to debate the matter in depth here, but will be glad to do so--at a mutually convenient time-- in a context that itself allows simultaneous aural communication! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be very glad to participate in a panel discussion/debate on the topic. But -- just as Mr. Merritt concedes that chat rooms are "very much slower" -- so also is this forum (which, perhaps, some might validly describe as a chat room). And some (not all) of the very reasons why a chat room is poor substitute for a deliberative assembly apply to debates/discussions here-- which is why I decline the challenge to debate the matter in depth here, but will be glad to do so--at a mutually convenient time-- in a context that itself allows simultaneous aural communication! ;)

Fair enough. But I doubt most regular chat room users would consider this fourm to be a chat room, as the term normally is used. Perhaps part of the problem is a lack of understanding of the actual nature of a properly-conducted chat room meeting. If so, maybe a debate would help to dispel some of the concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough. But I doubt most regular chat room users would consider this fourm to be a chat room, as the term normally is used. Perhaps part of the problem is a lack of understanding of the actual nature of a properly-conducted chat room meeting. If so, maybe a debate would help to dispel some of the concerns.

Cheer up, the situation is worse than you think. Based upon my own personal experience, I am convinced that no meetings of any kind other than those held in a single room or area are held “under equivalent conditions of opportunity for simultaneous aural communication among all participants.”

Forget about chat rooms. I have recently been involved in a number of telephone conference-call meetings (none involving more than five participants), and not one of them offered an opportunity for aural communication anywhere near to being equivalent to that offered by a meeting held in a single room or area.

Be that as it may, in setting forth (on pp. 1-2) the characteristics of a deliberative assembly, RONR is simply defining the kinds of gatherings to which its rules are principally applicable. This doesn’t mean that your chat rooms can’t use any of them. Be our guest!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheer up, the situation is worse than you think. Based upon my own personal experience, I am convinced that no meetings of any kind other than those held in a single room or area are held “under equivalent conditions of opportunity for simultaneous aural communication among all participants.”

Forget about chat rooms. I have recently been involved in a number of telephone conference-call meetings (none involving more than five participants), and not one of them offered an opportunity for aural communication anywhere near to being equivalent to that offered by a meeting held in a single room or area.

Be that as it may, in setting forth (on pp. 1-2) the characteristics of a deliberative assembly, RONR is simply defining the kinds of gatherings to which its rules are principally applicable. This doesn’t mean that your chat rooms can’t use any of them. Be our guest!

I suppose a lot depends upon what is meant by “equivalent.” Certainly, it cannot mean “identical,” so how closely does it have to mimic what takes place “in a single room or area”? I definitely concur about teleconference meetings, which is why I believe chat room meetings actually are superior in the accuracy, if not the speed, of the information conveyed. And, I have no doubt that chat room meetings con use the rules in RONR; the one in which I participate has been doing so very successfully for at least a couple of years now. Which of course leads to the question: What is the real significance, if any, of whether a given meeting is or is not a “deliberative assembly”?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps it may best be understood as encouraging groups that intend to employ electronic meetings to structure them in ways that comport with the definition of deliberative assembly, in preference to ways that do not – although, through appropriate provisions in bylaws and special rules of order, they are of course free to structure electronic meetings–or, for that matter, any sort of meetings-- however they choose to do so, whether the consequent assembly fits within the RONR definition of deliberative assembly or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps it may best be understood as encouraging groups that intend to employ electronic meetings to structure them in ways that comport with the definition of deliberative assembly, in preference to ways that do not – although, through appropriate provisions in bylaws and special rules of order, they are of course free to structure electronic meetings–or, for that matter, any sort of meetings-- however they choose to do so, whether the consequent assembly fits within the RONR definition of deliberative assembly or not.

That seems reasonable and logical, and the group to which I belong does that to a very high degree of conformance. It meets every one of the distinguishing characteristics listed at RONR (11th ed.), p. 1, l. 8 to p. 2, l. 17, with the sole exception that it does not “meet in a single room or area” (at least in the usual senses of those words), and communication during its meetings, while simultaneous, is not aural. Whether or not RONR would consider that group to be a deliberative assembly, we manage to function just as effectively as many groups that do meet every detail of the definition

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am convinced that no meetings of any kind other than those held in a single room or area are held “under equivalent conditions of opportunity for simultaneous aural communication among all participants.”

After what Weldon and I witnessed tonight, either of us would be hard pressed to disagree :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After what Weldon and I witnessed tonight, either of us would be hard pressed to disagree :)

Amen to that! But in all fairness I would have to say that the meeting George is referring to seemed to have exceptional difficulties that I have rarely experinced in a conference call. And when we finally switched to a different platform, we had far fewer difficulties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which of course leads to the question: What is the real significance, if any, of whether a given meeting is or is not a “deliberative assembly”?

Based on the discussion, I'm getting the idea that the characteristics of deliberative assemblies are primarily a set of assumptions inherent in the rules of RONR. If a group does not meet all of the characteristics of a deliberative assembly, this serves as a warning that many of the rules in the book will not apply to such a group, and that if the group wishes to use RONR, it will also need to adopt customized rules to fit its own unique circumstances.

Edit: Filled in a not hole.

Edited by Josh Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Based on the discussion, I'm getting the idea that the characteristics of deliberative assemblies are primarily a set of assumptions inherent in the rules of RONR. If a group does not meet all of the characteristics of a deliberative assembly, this serves as a warning that many of the rules in the book will apply to such a group, and that if the group wishes to use RONR, it will also need to adopt customized rules to fit its own unique circumstances.

Do I sense a "not hole"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 years later...

Hello all,

An interesting discussion going back 9 years ago.  As of today, I am the first and only PRP in the USA who is deaf and uses ASL.  I do have a greater responsibility when it comes to working with many organizations of the deaf when it comes to parliamentary law and procedure.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, Mark. You resurrected an oldie but goodie! Having been a member of eNAP for well over ten years, during which time we have managed to conduct business quite well using a chat room format, I still am not convinced that "aural" communication truly is essential to the deliberative process. Interestugly, however, it seems that eNAP may be about to conisder a different platform which will include aural communication. Unfortuanetly, that may make it impossible for deaf members to participate, unless we can figure out a way to make it work for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 10/15/2011 at 3:33 PM, Weldon Merritt said:

... some of us have been conducting them for quite some time now, using RONR with a number of special rules of order to fit our unique circumstances.

 

I, for one, would be very interested in seeing those special rules that make chat work for you.

My first concern regarding video/chatroom deliberations is that it is effectively impossible to reign in a problematic chair.  Secondarily, video just doesn't scale past the small board size.  Then there is the entire problem of being able to trust anything but a roll call vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nathan Zook said:

I, for one, would be very interested in seeing those special rules that make chat work for you.

You can read them here. However, the unit is now exploring several other meeting options that would not use a chat room, due largely to some of the issues we have encountered over the years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...