Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Daniel H. Honemann

Moderators
  • Content Count

    7,120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Daniel H. Honemann

  • Rank
    Fisherman

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Timonium, Maryland

Recent Profile Visitors

6,032 profile views
  1. Daniel H. Honemann

    wording in bylaws to state use of RRO

    I think it's rather interesting that a mere statement by the authors of their intent is first construed here as an unjustifiable "claim", and then characterized as "some sort of decree from on high." Maybe you all better read it again. πŸ™‚
  2. Daniel H. Honemann

    Summary Sheet for Robert's Rules of Order

    How come everybody thinks that stuff that is inherently rather complex can be usefully reduced to fit on something the size of a postcard? πŸ™‚
  3. Daniel H. Honemann

    Amending draft minutes

    Yeah, and I'd grant the same award to those who say "over and out", which I'm afraid we hear rather frequently.
  4. Daniel H. Honemann

    Rescind and conflicting Rules

    No, all I was doing was pointing out that a two-thirds vote sometimes constitutes a higher threshold to attain than does a majority of the entire membership.
  5. Daniel H. Honemann

    Rescind and conflicting Rules

    Yes, I suppose I should have said that "It may well be in certain instances ...", instead of assuming that it would be understood.
  6. Daniel H. Honemann

    Rescind and conflicting Rules

    It may well be, especially since the OP says it's an eleven member board.
  7. Daniel H. Honemann

    Objecting to consideration --- Striking from the minutes?

    If the question as to inclusion in the minutes of a motion which an assembly has refused to consider at one of its meetings is first raised when the secretary's draft (including, as it should, the spurned motion) is presented for approval, then I agree that it will have to be raised by moving to amend ("correct") the secretary's draft by striking out that portion of the minutes which makes reference to it. If the chair rules (as I think he should) that such a motion is not in order, then a member may move to suspend the rules which interfere with the consideration and adoption of this motion to amend ("correct") the minutes. This is the course of action I would suggest. Or, I suppose, an appeal might be taken from the ruling of the chair, arguing that the rule in the book is only a "should" rule, not a "must" rule, and therefore the motion to correct the minutes is in order and can be adopted by a majority vote. Now all of us here on the Forum can cast a vote as to whether or not the ruling of the chair should be sustained. πŸ™‚
  8. Daniel H. Honemann

    Objecting to consideration --- Striking from the minutes?

    Let's take this one step at a time. First of all, it seems to me that an organization could adopt a special rule of order providing that the minutes of its proceedings shall not include any motion which was not considered due to an objection to its consideration having been sustained. If this is so, then I would also think that such a rule could be adopted for a single session by a two-thirds vote. And if this is so, then I would also think that the rules could be suspended so as to allow the assembly to agree that a particular motion which was not considered due to a sustained objection to its consideration not be recorded in the minutes. Drafting of such a rule or motion won't be as easy as it might seem because allowance may have to be made for the possibility of the undesirable motion being carried over to a subsequent meeting or session due to a motion to reconsider the vote that sustained the objection to its consideration being made but not taken up at the meeting at which it was made, but I suppose this won't present an insurmountable problem. Or I guess the rule could also ban reconsideration.
  9. Daniel H. Honemann

    Proposed rules of order

    Since rule number one is obviously not a rule of order, that's as far as I got. πŸ™‚
  10. Daniel H. Honemann

    Motions

    Looks like you're not supposed to make any, although I suspect that privileged motions (a motion to Recess, for example) would probably be entertained.
  11. Daniel H. Honemann

    Motions

    No need to refer to me by my title.
  12. Daniel H. Honemann

    Motions

    One reason would be that they have a rule which says that only questions can be asked (no motions made) under "Information and Enquiries".
  13. Daniel H. Honemann

    Motions

    You can if they let you.
  14. Daniel H. Honemann

    Removal of a member

    Dismemberment?
×