Dan Honemann

The answer to your question depends upon whether your bylaws prohibit individual members of Group B from endorsing candidates or just Group B itself. You haven't quoted enough of your bylaws for anyone to tell.

Frankly, this advice is so bad it ought to be deleted.

No, nothing in RONR grants the president any such power.

No.

On page 405, we are told that: "A plurality that is not a majority never chooses a proposition or elects anyone to office except by virtue of a special rule previously adopted. If such a rule is to apply to the election of officers, it must be prescribed in the bylaws." When the bylaws prescribe that RONR is the parliamentary authority (using RONR's suggested language), the above quoted rules are effectively incorporated by reference into the bylaws, and so the footnote on page 16 correctly tells us that no special rule of order can validly be adopted providing for election of officers by plurality vote. This, however, does not mean that the rule that a plurality vote that is not a majority never elects anyone to office is a rule which cannot be suspended. It does not make a rule requiring a majority vote for election to office a rule which cannot be suspended. These are not fundamental principles of parliamentary law.

This thread is obviously going nowhere, and ought to stop.

This appears to be an entirely irrelevant observation. Neither is there anything in RONR that qualifies him for serving as president (or parliamentarian, for that matter).

It all began with General Robert himself referring to the first three editions of his book as RO (for Rules of Order), and the fourth edition as ROR (for Rules of Order Revised). He was too modest to include a letter for his own name.

Oh, I suspect that this was just another name given to a motion to suspend the rules that interfere with taking up business out of its proper order, as discussed in RONR on pages 363-64. On second thought, I guess not because both are included in the same list. Sorry about that.

Yes, and I can't imagine why objecting to its consideration was suggested as a proper course of action to take in this event.

Okay, you can tack that on as an exception to your previous post regarding the ineffectiveness of hell or high water.

I suppose adjournment doesn't fall within the category of hell or high waters. 🙂

No.

Two points which may or may not be relevant. Adoption of a special rule of order requires previous notice and a two-thirds vote. If previous notice has not been given, the vote of a majority of the entire membership is required for adoption. As a consequence, if previous notice has not been given, and a majority of the entire membership is not present, erroneous declaration of adoption of such a rule will be null and void, since it violates a rule protecting absentees. Rules fixing the hour and place of meetings are standing rules, not rules of order.

No rule in RONR requires that voting in disciplinary proceedings be by ballot if no member demands a ballot vote.

I think it should be assuming it was adopted along with the bylaws.

I don't see how this question can be answered without additional facts. What rules are in place relating to the preparation of these ballots? Who prepares them and how and when are they distributed?

Is it clear that offering such a motion falls within the assigned function of this committee? If so, then I think the motion should be moved in behalf of the committee as a part of its report. If not, the committee should not be making it at all.

I suspect that if Mr. Gerber's response doesn't satisfy, nothing will.

Fine. Let's let it go at that. 🙂

And forget about your letter.

You can make your motion to amend or rescind (if you have said exactly what this is I'm afraid that I missed it), and if it is not adopted you can give notice that you will make the same motion again at your next regular meeting.

If your secretary doesn't send out notices of your regular monthly meetings (RONR says that he should unless you have some rule providing otherwise), then I'm afraid that the only way for you to give previous notice is to do so at a meeting.

If, under the rules of the organization, a valid call can still be sent out to all members, then notice may be included in that call.

I think that, in either of these instances, no previous notice can be given.