Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

TheGrandRascal

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

141 profile views
  1. There seems to be a disagreement here as to whether or not the verbiage I've cited does, or whether it does not, create a legitimate and honest-to-goodness ambiguity within the Sample Bylaws... just as, I am quite sure, there would be a similar disagreement within the Sample Society, if it actually existed. That interests me, in part, because while RONR clearly says that only a simple majority vote is needed to resolve an ambiguity, it says nothing at all about the vote needed to decide whether an ambiguity actually exists! No doubt a majority vote would be needed here, too, but it'd be n
  2. Seems to me that the issue here is not so much redundancy -- because there can be occasions when it makes good sense to be redundant -- rather, the issue here seems to be unnecessary redundancy. That's just begging for trouble.
  3. My view is that if there is even the possibility of confusion or conflict in this matter -- if it is even the tiniest bit ambiguous -- then that more than amply justifies the amendment proposed. Why risk buying trouble?
  4. THE TRAP IN RRONR-11's SAMPLE BYLAWS: Robert's Sample Bylaws contain a Trap! Article V, Section 1, states that "The regular meetings of the Society shall be held on the second Tuesday of each month from September to May inclusive, unless otherwise ordered by the Society" -- that is, the Society has the power to change the date of an individual regular meeting at need. (And, BTW, kudos to them for adding the word "inclusive"!) This is perfectly fine. BUT, the Trap comes in Section 2: "The regular meeting on the second Tuesday in April shall be known as the annual meeting, and sha
×
×
  • Create New...