Gary c Tesser

(LoganLady, kindly disregard all this internecine squabbling. Me and Cad goes back a ways.)

Post-mortem? you gonna kill us? What the hell kinda aspiring parliamentarian do you take yourself for?

OK, back to the beginning. (I concede I think Mr Awful Cad touched on this.) Who prevented the accused from voting? And how? (And, signally, when?) (Ooo, we finally again discussing parliamentary procedure! Somebody wake Mr Homebody up! -- or however you spell his name.) __________ N.B. I say "Awful" because I don't concede Sainthood. Contrarily, I do accept Her LoganLady's LoganLadyShip because, perforce, she is, and spectacularly, Her own, and exemplarily (did I mention "spectacularly"?) LoganLadyShip.

Thank hevvins, Josh, I been waiting all bloody day for you.

Your jealousy (or envy, I'm not sure which is which) noted, you adorable sock-puppet-face you.

I certainly hope he does not. (O Dan, our first quarrel.)

Back to the beginning -- The motion did not pass. Whatever difference does the term of office make?

I agree. Referring to a member as "a tiny little yippy-chihuahua type gal" is never to be tolerated. I don't think we do agree. This yippy-dog stuff is just someone's opinion, voiced outside of a meeting, and not even that of the president. I'm certainly going to tolerate it. And I think you would too if you took that damn frumpy tie off and let the grandchildren tickle you so you drop that frown. Your fan, Gary

LoganLady, is this the bottom line? Is this how things stand now, with the organization? Either way, have you read RONR, 11th Edition, Chapter Twenty, yet? (Have you hit your head on a wall yet? I have. Not your head, mine. I have no idea what state or country your head is in. But for that matter, I have no idea what state my own head is in. (Perhaps I digress. (Wups, the INternet says Mr Honemann is going to spank me again. Let's go look.)

Come on, LoganLady. However were the accused prevented from voting? What, the accusers said they can't, and everyone sat still for this? You all sexagenarians and octogenarians, and you sit still for this crap (I acknowledge that it can be painful to stand up) from these teenagers (40-y-o &c)?

Going back a bit (I think last Sunday,,,) ... The presiding officer needs to know to nip this crap in the bud.

Yes, of course. But you buried this fundamental point inside a lot of gunk, like the minutiae of Calling The Question, so I figured to tell this lovely Marine Corps lady to just start over. And, consequently, as I said, no disrespect. You wouldn't be the first gibbering idiot to post on the Robert's Rules Website Forum (I got here way before you did).

No, no, no. Absolutely not. This would be fundamentally abandoning, by the chairwoman, her authority, and her duty, to conduct the meeting properly and efficiently. She does not need to ask them anything -- in the book or anywhere else. She conducts the meeting: efficiently, smoothly, fairly, honestly, democratically, &c. -- but, as the representative of the assembly, she is The Law. If they have a problem with what she says, they can raise a Point Of Order. Otherwise, shut up and sit still.

O, and incidentally, there are parliamentary questions, if I can remember any of them.

She wants to kill someone, and maybe they deserve it (and I think I agree), but I council her to refrain. We are not married yet. She is very coy.

This is lighting a cigarette in a gale. What, a civilized decent person being stunned by monstrous nastiness? She being competently prepared to preside over a meeting with normal meeting business, but not for crazy disruptive antics?

I so sympathize, but please don't. If you were a redhead, I would marry you and have your baby on the spot. So get a grip. At least one of us ought to.

O LoganLady, I would love to visit you. But not in Sing Sing.

(O, and I addressed "your fan" to LoganLady, not to you grumpy guys.) Your fan, Gary c Tesser

LoganLady, please, let me also emphatically request this. Look: we, here on The World's Pre-Eminent Parliamentary Internet Forum (Reg. Penna. Dept. Agr.), mostly want to help. Mr Honemann gets grumpy when pollyannas like me treat the place like what the Brits call an agony column, but you know what, if they don't want to read it, they can go on to the next post, like, Can The President Vote?, and yadda yadda. Great Steaming Cobnuts. Why don't you have a National Senior Executive Nostril while you're at it? You do know that I really, really, really object to the censoring. But you also should know that I read it all so that you don't have to. No, it wasn't at all. LoganLady, please stay. I had to go out (to visit with a ten-year-old Canadian girl and a 70-year-old American woman). And I been sick. But I'm still typing. Your fan, Gary c Tesser

I'm still drowning here. I'm not sure if a policy manual, rather than the bylaws, can dictate how elections are conducted. So I'm probably not done. (But I have been fighting asthma for a couple of weeks, so I'm not sure how much oxygen my brain is getting.)

Is this a follow-up question to a previously-posted topic? If so, please say what that topic is. Otherwise, we have little clew as to what you're talking about. Aside from which: Campground wages sing this song, doo dah, doo dah, Campground wages sing this song, O the doo dah day...

(Jumping ahead. I haven't read any of this thread for a while. And maybe I won't, not for a while yet. I'm recovering from 11 hours of Breaking Bad marathon yesterday. (But myghod. (I so love this website.)

Baby steps: what kind of meeting was this, please?

C' mon, LoganLady, work with us here.