Gary Novosielski

Very much so.

My advice was intended for the general case. The exception, as it so often does, proves the rule. In some cases the proof may exceed two digits, depending on the souse.

No, that would be called a "plurality" vote. Under the rules of RONR, no one is elected with less than a majority, unless your bylaws say so. In order to achieve a majority, a candidate must have not merely the largest number of votes, but more votes than all the other candidates put together, i.e., a true majority (more than half) of the votes cast for that office. If none of the candidates have a majority, the results are announced so that all voters know the vote counts, and another ballot is held, with no names being dropped (unless they withdraw). Nominations may be reopened between ballots if desired. Eventually, it it hoped, voters will settle on a candidate before food and supplies run out.

In general, people who are soused should avoid serving on boards until they sober up.😵

The obligation is not merely to conduct a ballot vote, it is to complete the election. If it takes 158 ballots to do so, then that is the requisite number. If elections are incomplete, then the action required of the chair is to take another ballot, or take some other action to complete the election, such as entertaining a motion to reopen nominations, or to set a time for an adjourned meeting at which balloting will continue. There is no such thing as a motion to close elections. If there is a persistent insufficiency of volunteers to fill critical offices, it might be time for the society to seriously consider taking actions to dissolve the organization.

But safer than swearing at him in person.

No, you continue to vote until someone achieves a majority.

No, it clearly says "the bylaws, or by action of the assembly in the individual case." Those are the only two options.

I agree the timing should not matter, but Mr. Elsman's position would seem to argue otherwise. I don't think there's any doubt that during reading and approval of minutes, the assembly may decide what goes into the minutes by a majority vote. Therefore, the same threshold should apply at any prior time. Once approved, the minutes then fall into the category of something previously adopted, and the rules for amendment change.

Your bylaws contain the names of the officers? That makes no sense.

Have I become undone? (checks fly)

Since corrections to the minutes can be approved by a majority vote, why would we assume that it would take a greater vote to include something if done at the meeting that it occurred, than it would if the matter was included as a correction at the following meeting?

You are understanding me correctly, I believe. I disagree with Mr. Kapur as regards the quorum requirement. Since the statute states that a vote to ratify or reject the budget can occur even in the absence of a quorum, it is my belief that this implies that the motion to ratify may be made even in the absence of a quorum.

No. 11 is not greater than or equal to 11.33... Twelve votes would be required. It would meet the requirement if the threshold were the standard 2/3 vote as defined in RONR, which is: 2/3 of those present and voting (not merely eligible to vote, but actually voting). In that case it would suffice, since 11 is at least twice as much as 4.