Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I mostly agree, but I’m not sure I agree fully. I do agree that committees that are subordinate to the national committee cannot suspend this special rule of order which prohibits electronic participation in face-to-face meetings. However, I believe the national committee itself can suspend that rule for its own meetings. It is also still my opinion that the bylaw provision itself, standing alone, can be interpreted either way and that it is up to the organization to interpret that provision.
  3. Which is a good time to point out that RONR is a set of rules for facilitating meetings and respecting rights. It's worth looking around and seeing where rights are violated rather than swinging wildly at every parliamentary concern.
  4. I agree on both counts. We had electronic meetings where everyone was electronic, and we had quarterly meetings where everyone was in the room or did not participate at all. If I recall correctly, there was one time where someone couldn't make it and asked to participate electronically, and we told no. And I agree that this is for good reason.
  5. This bylaw provision seems to me to be rather clear, and, in my opinion, if the special rules of order promulgated by the National Committee specifically provide that electronic participation is not permitted in face to face meetings of boards and committees which are subordinate to the National Committee, this rule may not be suspended by any such subordinate board or committee.
  6. Today
  7. Yes, it would appear that you are reading what is said in the footnote on page 562 correctly. Do you have any specific question about that footnote?
  8. If RONR is your parliamentary authority, you have no need to. So relax. 🙂
  9. I have seen the practice of a well-respected chairman to include her vote in counted votes. Her position was then known to the teller(s) but no one else. And when (as it did), a situation arose that one might might effect the outcome, and members called for her vote, she responded, "My vote was included in the count". And the general membership never did know how she voted.
  10. FAQ #1 explains this.
  11. Yep. Just reread 49 & 50 and the relevant paragraphs in 1. I had gotten it into my head that there was a statement about executive boards being a type of committee, but even that is clearly wrong.
  12. I feel a bit like I'm watching my parents argue here... But I remain deeply confused over the term FPPL. It appears in a few places in RONR, usually in the form of "X is a FPPL". But I have no way, from RONR, to understand what an FPPL is or how something is determined to be an FPPL. Of course, the purpose of the rules is to allow the majority to work its will while paying due regard to the rights of minorities, especially large ones, and of individual members, as well as those not present. From this, I can derive the principle of majoritarianism for most things as an FPPL. Also, that members have a right to a fair trial, and that notice is required for meetings and separately for momentous actions (amending bylaws and elections) and at least some of the requirements for unanimous consent. But how do I derive that there exists a FPPL that a two-thirds vote is the correct threshold to suppress a motion for the duration of a session? Why not three-fifths or three-fourths? How am I to understand what is the list of FPPLs except by seeing what is called an FPPL in RONR? This is by far the most frustrating question that I have in regards to RONR.
  13. Additionally, the structure you describe is quite complex. It is probably worthwhile to have a Professional Registered Parliamentarian go over your bylaws to see what can be done. In particular, I am nervous about Mr. Martin's view about filling vacancies as such rules often provide for vacancies to be filled by the remainder of a body all of which go out of office at the same time. Exact wordings of each relevant portion of the bylaws are going to be very important.
  14. Got it. I am very familiar with VBulletin having ran a Theology and Politics debate forum for over a decade, and we took at look at Invision. It can definitely be changed fairly easily - I will try to find one of my friends who worked with the Invision software to find out how. Things like that were a very simple setting in VBulletin.
  15. Invision Community from Invision Power Services (formerly known as IP Board)
  16. Are you sure you're not describing my national party? Because this sounds exactly like the sort of garbage we're constantly facing. I'm the one with the sole stickler role in my county committee executive board. Really, really frustrating to face down six or seven shouties meeting after meeting. One lever that I have found useful is to point out that in the event of a lawsuit, playing fast & loose with procedure is an all-expense-paid ticket to Looserville. But in the end, if you're outnumbered four to one, per RONR, you're supposed to lose. A lot. Even matters of bylaws interpretations come down to majority votes. Which means that the rules nerd is forced into playing the social game and figuring out, one by one, what lever works on individual members to convince them to do the right thing. Sadly, few people "get it" that rules procedures are important if you want a body to cohere until they witness a complete breakdown. Even then, we often want to assign blame in a way that doesn't create a lot of work for us.
  17. Start here and follow the links: https://robertsrules.forumflash.com/topic/25416-important-read-this-first-faq-and-information-for-new-members-and-guests/
  18. Mr. Honneman let me clarify one thing again to be sure. Am I correct that if the proposal comes not from a committee but from the membership (we do allow that with proper notice) that it would not be fully open to revision as discussed above?
  19. That is what they are planning I believe. If I end up being on the bylaws committee, it will be explored for sure. Its a political organization so things are...... very....... political. Right now, people who hate bylaws are the ones getting put on these committees as there is a strong anti-rules and anti-bylaws sentiment in our organization. I keep telling them, be careful what you wish for.
  20. LOL the first Church of RONR. Let us now turn to Bring Back Motions, Verse 2
  21. They "can" vote like any other member unless your bylaws or rules say otherwise. They shouldn't however unless it is to cause or break a tie or in elections by secret ballot.
  22. Guest

    President's Vote

    Please confirm in which situations a president may cast a vote. Tie breakers only? Election of officers?
  1. Load more activity
  • Create New...