Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

"Abstain" - use of


Guest Sherry

Recommended Posts

When someone was not at a meeting or any part of a discussion up for vote, is it appropriate to "abstain", or should one avoid participating at all ?  I tried to avoid voting on minutes of a meeting I did not attend, and I thought that abstaining was applied when one was part of a discussion but chooses not to vote one way or the other, based on having knowledge of the topic.   When one is completely missing in action, I thought it was best not to participate in the vote at all, and I see abstaining as participating in the vote.  

????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Guest Sherry said:

When someone was not at a meeting or any part of a discussion up for vote, is it appropriate to "abstain", or should one avoid participating at all ?  I tried to avoid voting on minutes of a meeting I did not attend, and I thought that abstaining was applied when one was part of a discussion but chooses not to vote one way or the other, based on having knowledge of the topic.   When one is completely missing in action, I thought it was best not to participate in the vote at all, and I see abstaining as participating in the vote.  

????

That's completely up to the member, but no rule requires a member to abstain or otherwise not vote.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Todd Crowder said:

Under Robert's, when a person abstains from a vote, they do not announce that they abstain, they do nothing.

 

Correct, but, if it's important the minutes note the member's abstention, perhaps for obvious reason, he/she is permitted to request that his/her abstention be entered on the minutes - thus it may be recorded if requested. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a couple problems with the abstaining aspect:

1)  Some issues require previous notice, such as By-law amendments.  Just because a member missed the previous meeting, it would be foolish to say that the member has to abstain.  Nothing was discussed, just that notice was given.

2)  The member has the right to have an opinion, and to voice that opinion - both through debate and through a vote (if the member chooses.)  The member may actually have important information to share about the issue which may end up swaying how other members vote.  A motion could be passed or defeated if the member voted and/or entered into debate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Guest Sherry said:

S1.) When someone was not at a meeting or any part of a discussion up for vote, is it appropriate to "abstain",

or

should one avoid participating at all?  

S2.) I tried to avoid voting on minutes of a meeting I did not attend,

and I thought that

abstaining was applied when one was part of a discussion but chooses not to vote one way or the other,

based on having knowledge of the topic.  

S3.) When one is completely missing in action, I thought it was best not to participate in the vote at all,

and I see abstaining as participating in the vote. 

 

Your distinction is garbled.

Q. Are you equating

(a.) abstaining;

with

(b.) not-debating?

***

Q. Are you equating

(a.) debating;

with

(b.) not-abstaining?

That is a logically fallacious choice. The two acts are not even related.

   • You can debate, debate, debate, and then choose to abstain.

   • You could abstain, despite debating vigorously, for every minute of your two (or more?) opportunities.

The two acts (viz., to debate; and to abstain) are not mutually exclusive.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2016 at 0:27 PM, Sherry said:

So doing NOTHING is also appropriate ??

 

Doing nothing is, by definition, abstaining from everything.

But there is no rule in RONR that requires a member to abstain from voting on a motion when he was not present during debate, nor is there a rule that prevents a member from offering or voting on corrections to the minutes of a meeting at which he was not present.  There is not even any strong suggestion that he should refrain from doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2016 at 0:50 AM, Rev Ed said:

There are a couple problems with the abstaining aspect:

1)  Some issues require previous notice, such as By-law amendments.  Just because a member missed the previous meeting, it would be foolish to say that the member has to abstain.  Nothing was discussed, just that notice was given.

2)  The member has the right to have an opinion, and to voice that opinion - both through debate and through a vote (if the member chooses.)  The member may actually have important information to share about the issue which may end up swaying how other members vote.  A motion could be passed or defeated if the member voted and/or entered into debate. 

These are actually useful points, I think, after mulling about them for a while and only slowly appreciating their subtleties.  Nicely done.

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...