George Mervosh

Unless the governing documents or applicable statute say otherwise, the board has complete discretion in this matter. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 644-645 and 648-650.

If this is a convention of delegates and it's not a part of the proposed standing rules, you can make a motion to add such a rule. See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 619-620.

Yes, but it would be unusual for them to not be adopted at all given that they are amendable and any individual rule can be divided on demand (perhaps one of the more controversial ones?)

Yes, if they are present when the vote is taken. There is never a need to abstain just because they missed some or all of the discussion. Here is the rule regarding abstentions in RONR: "No member should vote on a question in which he has a direct personal or pecuniary interest not common to other members of the organization. For example, if a motion proposes that the organization enter into a contract with a commercial firm of which a member of the organization is an officer and from which contract he would derive personal pecuniary profit, the member should abstain from voting on the motion. However, no member can be compelled to refrain from voting in such circumstances. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 407

Perhaps we shouldn't renew Mr. Honemann's question and comments unless they present a substantially new set of questions and comments.

Start with this. http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#20

"A main motion, or a motion for the same amendment to a given motion, cannot be renewed at the same session unless there is a change in wording or circumstances sufficient to present substantially a new question, in which case this becomes technically a different motion. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 338 I think you're referring to this. But see this: " If a series of resolutions voted on together is lost, however, one or more of them can be offered again at the same session, but enough resolutions must be left out to present a genuinely different question from the viewpoint of probable voting result; otherwise this procedure becomes dilatory." RONR (11th ed.), p. 338 Ultimately the board can decide the matter. If you don't feel it is substantially, a new question, raise a point of order and the presiding officer will issue a ruling (subject to appeal) or put the question to the assembly to board to decide.

See RONR (11th ed.), pp. 97-99. There needs to by authorization for them in bylaws and there are many special rules that will need to be adopted. If not set up correctly it will be a huge mess with more questions than answers.

Amendments to the bylaws are debatable and only the assembly at the annual meeting can limit or end/prohibit debate, via the proper motions to do so. Their statement is meaningless and not enforceable otherwise.

He might be referring to this - "After debate has begun or, if there is no debate, after any member has voted, the lack of a second has become immaterial and it is too late to make a point of order that the motion has not been seconded. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 37 I'm not sure I'd agree that the motion is properly considered seconded, it's just that it doesn't matter at this point. See pp. 35-37 for the passage on seconding a motion.

"*In the case of any resolution, motion, or paper placed before the assembly that has not been read even once, the chair normally should not put it to a vote or seek its approval or adoption without reading it (or having it read by the secretary) unless permission is first obtained by unanimous consent. In a case where the full text has been distributed to the members in advance and it is customary for the reading to be omitted, the chair may initially presume that there is no objection to omitting the reading (but any member still has the right to demand that it be read). Such a case typically involves adoption of an agenda; approval of the minutes; or, in a convention, the rules proposed by the Committee on Standing Rules or the program proposed by the Program Committee. (See also p. 38, l. 27 to p. 39, l. 6.) " RONR (11th ed.), p. 46fn

The assembly can decide to remove her from her duty to preside for this meeting if a problem evolves during the meeting. See this http://www.robertsrules.com/interp_list.html#2006_2 paying particular attention to the second paragraph of the answer and what follows.

I always knew you were an old softy.

No.

A marginal notation in the original minutes sounds like a good idea to me, even though the book doesn't say that.

Not. "An adjourned meeting of an ordinary society approves the minutes of the meeting that established the adjourned meeting; its own minutes are approved at the next adjourned or regular meeting, whichever occurs first. " RONR (11th ed.), p. 473

No, and see this. http://www.robertsrules.com/faq.html#16

See if §22. FIX THE TIME TO WHICH TO ADJOURN is what you're looking for. RONR (11th ed.), p. 242ff

"A society has no executive board, nor can its officers act as a board, except as the bylaws may provide; and when so established, the board has only such power as is delegated to it by the bylaws or by vote of the society's assembly referring individual matters to it." RONR (11th ed.), p. 482 RONR does not speak to the second part of your question.

Absolutely.

"Prior to or during a convention, members of a delegation may need or wish to meet as a group to decide how they will act with reference to certain matters to come before the convention; a meeting of this kind is usually called a caucus" RONR (11th ed.), p. 605 My understanding of the facts is the delegates will meet and, yes, decide how to proceed. They will be receiving input from others. So what? What did I miss in the original post?

See this. http://www.robertsrules.com/authority.html

Yes, that seems fine. See RONR (11th ed), pp. 605-607

It's probably more dangerous leaving the gun in the car, but, as usual I digress. Off to the 2FP meeting.

But you can't ban the member except by the disciplinary process and does your group want to adopt a dress code targeted at one member who isn't doing anything wrong? I agree with Mr. Wynn, time to move on.