Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

DrEntropy

Members
  • Content Count

    260
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Las Vegas, NV

Recent Profile Visitors

906 profile views
  1. Received my copy, love the new citation system!
  2. OH! SO that is why we are seeing these odd subject lines. Yeah "Title" is ambiguous. It is likely configurable in the forum software. Note that even the FAQ on the forum doesn't make this crystal clear: " In the "Topic Details" section, fill in the "Title" box with a brief title for your topic. Note: Enter the title you wish assigned to your topic. Please do not enter your personal title in the "Title" box. I would propose replacing "Enter the title you wish assigned to ..." with "Enter the subject .."
  3. Aha! I still have my picture, so that is good. Looks like the upgrade did change a few things, but I think it just will take some getting used to.
  4. I find "Save as webpage, complete" in firefox will save the discussion quite nicely. Right now I think the IP.Board is set to show 50 posts on one page, which is good enough for almost every thread on here. (IP.Board doesn't allow the individual user to adjust this number, unfortunately).
  5. I did get in after the 15 minute lockout...so nothing to fix for me at the moment. However i would not that this error is not the most friendly way to respond to incorrect passwords, if that is what is the trigger
  6. DrEntropy

    OGM's

    p. 251 (a) applies to the case where a main motion is adopted that conflicts with an already existing bylaw/constitition. The motion itself was out of order, and the action of adopting the motion is null and void due to the (already present) conflict. It doesnt apply to the the case we have been discussing in anyway that I can determine, since when the motion that established the standing rules was adopted, they were in order and not in conflict with the then existing bylaws.
  7. I program computers incidently to by occupation. The "Committee of the Whole" and "Quasi-Committee of the Whole" are in that world code that rarely, if ever gets executed. Such code tends to be buggy. I am not suprised that there are some things that are not so clear cut here. But I am eager to learn more, and look forward to this discussion continuing.
  8. That was the one i was looking for! But I still hold by "it depends", it is not clear that this is the same point being raised because I am not sure what "on the same topic" means, but I suspect i am reading too much between the lines, which I sometimes do when I have not yet completed my morning coffee.
  9. It depends .. what was the point ? More details might help. However, see RONR 11 pg. 342 l.11 and following, if the member is simply being obstructionist.
  10. Your bylaws and other documents of authority should be consulted as to what is or is not in the members authority. However, generally speaking I would opine that such things that are exclusively within the authority of the executive board cannot be directed otherwise by the membership. (RONR 11, pg 483 l. 9-15. A careful reading of pg 577-578 might also help.). I dont however see that a motion to 'request' that the board do something would be out of order, but the board is free to ignore it (perhaps at their own peril, come election time).
  11. Yes, I too have used and seen used the third form quite often as well. I was thinking of the first form when I made my statement, although in my experience I also have never seen the second form either (quasi-committee of the whole).
  12. I would opine that a motion to extend the limits of the debate to unlimited time and an unlimited number of speeches is in order*. I am not saying this is wise however. In the instant case, I agree with George that informal consideration is probably all you need. Ten minutes is a very long time to speak, and if a particular speaker really needs more, the assembly can allow it on a case by case basis. *If you disagree, then how about a motion to extend the limits of debate to 1000 speeches of 1 year each?
  13. Committee of the Whole House was the origin (UK Parliament). I have never seen it used, and honestly can't imagine any use for it in ordinary societies.
  14. Only your bylaws will determine the answer for this. For help interpreting them, see pg 588-591 in Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised 11th edition.
  15. About a year ago, there was a kindle version of this book, but it has since disappeared from Amazon. Are there plans to bring it back (perhaps improved by page numbers) or plans to produce some other electronic version? If this question is out of bounds on this forum I apologize in advance.
×
×
  • Create New...