Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Sean Hunt

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sean Hunt

  1. I've always been curious about complex systesm of rules and such, and I play Nomic on the Internet. I started in parliamentary procedure, however, when I discovered the online practice of the Canadian House of Commons Procedure and Practice. This is also what got me started on late-night Hansard sessions in high school. At some point in my investigations I learned of Robert's Rules, then promptly checked out the library's copy and read it. I had no occasion to use it, however, until I came to university, whereupon I immediately became the most knowledgeable member of my faculty's student ass
  2. In an assembly where the chair can't see everyone clearly, specifying the hand to use might serve to prevent double votes, but I would venture that if such a rule is required, your assembly is too large to effectively vote by show of hands anyway.
  3. That doesn't eliminate the recommendation that the President shouldn't be on the nominating committee, though
  4. I am going to go with Mr. Gerber on this one. I see no particular reason why the principle should not apply to reconsidering affirmative votes; there are simply far fewer ways in which a later action can conflict with undoing an affirmative one (and, in particular, none that will usually arise within the time limits to Reconsider so the authors behind that sentence may have been attempting to generalize somewhat, but did not generalize enough.
  5. But if we admit the motion to Reconsider while Rescind is pending, Rescind is postponed to the next meeting, and then the motion is reconsidered and defeated, what happens to the motion to Rescind? Should it just be deemed moot when it comes up at the next meeting and discarded?
  6. I assume this would be different if there were evidence (such as a record of a roll call vote) to the contrary.
  7. They (as is the case for committee members and officers) do not have a right; it is up to the assembly to decide whether or not they will accept a slideshow as part of debate.
  8. No. Your Board may, but you'll have to consult your bylaws to see. If they do not provide that authority, and the Board is subordinate to the membership (as is usually the case, but sometimes not, especially in corporations), then only a meeting of the full membership has the authority to do so, and (if your organization has adopted RONR as its parliamentary authority) only in accordance with Chapter XX of RONR. See also FAQ 20.
  9. Bonus points to the secretary if the minutes of the special meeting are finished in time for the regular one.
  10. Can notice of a (regular) meeting be given before the meeting is set? Suppose that the Vulcan Garden Gnomes Society normally schedules its regular meetings by resolution. At a meeting, however, they forgot to schedule their next meeting, and there was no other provision to hold a subsequent meeting. The bylaws require two weeks' notice of all regular meetings. This rather unfortunate circumstance does not doom the Society, however, as they have a provision for special meetings to be called by the President. Two weeks in advance, the President calls the special meeting, with the only item of bu
  11. Sean Hunt


    Robert's Rules doesn't forbid it, although it's quite possible that there may be relevant laws that do. This query is best directed at a lawyer.
  12. The issues lie in mixing votes taken outside the meeting with votes taken at the meeting. Paper ballots are fine if they are handled under the same circumstances, such as the meeting perfecting (amending) the motion before it is put to a vote, and then sending out a ballot to everyone. The really big issues arise when you accept ballots before the meeting, because then it is possible that different people have different perceptions of the question when they cast their votes.
  13. "couldn't". I meant "couldn't". I would rule such a motion in order (assuming it was in order to actually make motions to remove each board member).
  14. You do not need a motion to accept a report. The fact that the report has been submitted indicates its acceptance by the Board. As for adjournment, first off, it is not usual to have separate open and private sessions where you adjourn from one to the other; usually you simply have the board continue the same meeting, but in confidential session. In both cases, usually the chair will call for other new business before moving on, and if there is none, will just move on automatically. "I know of no more new business; is there any? No? Then we will now begin confidential session; I would like to
  15. If it's extremely unpopular, you can, as soon as the motion is made, object to its consideration; then a vote is taken and if two-thirds of those voting agree, then the motion is prevented from being brought forward at that meeting.
  16. Yes, and the issue is with your organization's custom. Officer's reports should not be recorded in the minutes; they should be submitted in writing and filed by the secretary. The minutes should merely note that the report was submitted.
  17. I don't see why a single motion could be offered to remove the entire Board as such, but I would rule that such a motion was divisible notwithstanding its form.
  18. For more clarity, to "table" something can mean at least four different things, depending on which authority you ask. Under RONR, tabling a motion is to set it aside temporarily to deal with urgent business, with the intent that it will be picked up again as soon as the other business is dealt with. As such, to table a motion (or more formally, to lay a motion on the table) with the intent of dealing with it at a future meeting is improper. Most prominent authorities, including RONR, prefer the unambiguous term Postpone to a Certain Time to refer to putting a motion off to the next meeting.
  19. I don't think it would be an improper amendment. A motion to take no position being rejected does not imply that the assembly is either in support of or in opposition to a measure. As such, a motion to oppose the measure would be quite different from failing to take no position. However, I think that the first error made was accepting a motion to take no position at all. Since an assembly by default has no position, a motion to take no position has no effect and is therefore out of order. Once you had that pending, however, I would say that the parliamentarian was correct in suggesting that th
  20. Mr. Tesser is suggesting that perhaps Gladys is under exactly that misconception.
  21. Not unless your bylaws specifically say so. Normally, the results of the vote need to be announced at a meeting so that a member can raise an objection to the procedure (such as requesting a recount, or objecting to the President's choice of tellers).
  • Create New...