Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

11th edition


Guest Pam Lindgren

Recommended Posts

Our association Bylaws say we must follow the most current edition of Roberts Rules.

Our Board has been following the 10th edition . Are motions that passed that are contrary to the 11th edition changes valid ?

 

The changes between the 10th and 11th editions are not exactly earth-shattering, so if your board has been properly following the 10th edition, it's not very likely that your board has adopted any motions that are contrary to the 11th edition. Even if there was a conflict, it would take a very severe violation to make the motion null and void at this point. In most cases, a Point of Order must be raised at the time of the breach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our association Bylaws say we must follow the most current edition of Roberts Rules.

Our Board has been following the 10th edition .

 

Q. Are motions that passed that are contrary to the 11th edition changes valid ?

I seriously doubt that you have such a motion.

 

Q. Just for curiosity -- What do you have which appears to be in conflict?

(I've got Las Vegas money riding on this one, if there are any odds-takers out there.) B)

 

***

 

The authorship team takes great pains to see that each edition is backwards-compatible, i.e., no abrupt changes.

New 'changes' in subsequent editions, are, 99% of the time, mere "clarifications".

 

So, actions which would have been

valid per the 2011 eleventh ediion and yet

invalid under the 2000 tenth edition

are as highly unlikely as hen's teeth or unicorns, or jackalopes. :o

 

***

 

Parliamentary errors (i.e., procedural errors) are typically rules which can be suspended, since they are, by and large, "in the nature of being a rule of order".

(The exceptions are "continuing breaches", which are relatively rare, given the volume fo business done in thousands of nonprofit organizations.)

So, even if you adopted or rejected a given motion, the chances of the error invalidating the adoption/rejection are long odds indeed. -- One in, say, a hundred? a thousand?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our association Bylaws say we must follow the most current edition of Roberts Rules.

Our Board has been following the 10th edition . Are motions that passed that are contrary to the 11th edition changes valid ?

I was concerned about Chapter XX ,also retention of ballots. This is my 1st time on the forum , I was unable to find  my 10th addition to compare changes. If I took up your time for no good reason,Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our association Bylaws say we must follow the most current edition of Roberts Rules.

Our Board has been following the 10th edition . Are motions that passed that are contrary to the 11th edition changes valid ?

 

Yes they are.  (And if you actually passed one, I'll give you a dollar.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was concerned about Chapter XX ,also retention of ballots.

Have you conducted any disciplinary procedures recently? There may be some cause for concern there.

It's easier to destroy ballots under the 11th edition than the 10th, and keeping ballots too long is an easy thing to fix, so I wouldn't be concerned about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's' my understanding that the most significant changes in the 11th edition are in chapter XX on disciplinary matters, but, like the others have said, I think it extremely unlikely that any disciplinary action taken pursuant to the provisions of the 10th edition would be invalid because of those changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's' my understanding that the most significant changes in the 11th edition are in chapter XX on disciplinary matters, but, like the others have said, I think it extremely unlikely that any disciplinary action taken pursuant to the provisions of the 10th edition would be invalid because of those changes.

Well, I think the change from the accused being automatically suspended of his rights (except those relating to the trial) after charges are preferred to the accused being suspended of his rights only if the assembly adopts a motion to do could cause problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I think the change from the accused being automatically suspended of his rights (except those relating to the trial) after charges are preferred to the accused being suspended of his rights only if the assembly adopts a motion to do could cause problems.

 

Rescinding an election would be rather touchy as well.  (pp. 642-3 in the 10th).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...