Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Shmuel Gerber

Administrators
  • Content Count

    2,397
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Shmuel Gerber

  • Rank
    @ShmuelGerber on Twitter

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Brooklyn, NY

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Shmuel Gerber

    Annual Meeting - Set for wrong week?

    Remind me to stay away from the ISO, especially on weekends. ๐Ÿ™‚
  2. I mean that Mr. Brown generously quoted more than 700 words from the official RONR books. While excerpts can be helpful in answering particular questions, we like to encourage visitors to this website to obtain the books and refer to the text themselves. See http://www.robertsrules.com/book.html
  3. Hey, how about leaving some goodies reserved for people who actually buy the book(s)? ๐Ÿ˜€
  4. Shmuel Gerber

    Consideration of a Substitute

    Me neither. After the first six posts, this topic seems to have branched out in various confusing ways. No. The motion to substitute is the primary amendment, which consists of two parts: striking out the original paragraph(s) and inserting the proposed substitute.
  5. Shmuel Gerber

    Consideration of a Substitute

    I'm sorry to say that I don't think this explanation is helpful or correct. The rule at issue is this: "But for purposes of secondary amendment, the motion to substitute is looked upon as resolved into its two elements, the paragraph to be struck out and the paragraph to be inserted." (RONR 11th ed., p. 154, ll. 10-13) The motion to substitute is a primary amendment. While this primary amendment is pending, any amendments offered to the pending (original) motion are in the nature of secondary amendments to the paragraph to be struck out; and any amendments offered to the substitute are in the nature of secondary amendments to the paragraph to be inserted.
  6. I hope we won't be seeing much more of this hideous abbreviation. ๐Ÿ™‚
  7. Shmuel Gerber

    Point of Discussion Not on Agenda

    Or you could move to adjourn the meeting.
  8. Shmuel Gerber

    Motion to not consider

    I don't see why this situation should get to the point of applying an objection to consideration, and it seems to me that if the assembly votes to adopt an agenda that includes specifically worded motions for which previous notice has been given, such an objection is likely dilatory. But getting back to the point of when an objection can normally be raised, I think it could be done after the main motion is moved, even before the chair has stated the question on it. I vaguely recall that there was an earlier thread on this topic, perhaps before the 11th edition was published. I also wouldn't read the quoted text from page 250 as implying that a point of order can't be raised before the chair states the question. It simply says that *if* the chair is erroneously stating the question, that is the time to raise a point of order -- not after the debate has begun.
  9. Shmuel Gerber

    Annual meeting

    @John Ashley Note: I merged your two posts into one. You might not get any responses by email, but you can follow this topic and choose to receive an email update whenever a new response is posted.
  10. Shmuel Gerber

    Voting for yourself.

    But probably best not to vote for Mitt; he's a little busy these days.
  11. Since that doesn't make any sense, it would not suffice just as well, nor would it be the least bit correct.
  12. In that case, I have some rebuttals for you. :-) And welcome to the forum! You can't move to refer a main motion that hasn't been stated by the chair, and the chair shouldn't state a motion offered in a wording that is not clear or that contains no rational proposition. And see also p. 395, l. 28 to p. 396, l.5. The rules on pages 172-173 relate specifically to a motion to Commit (i.e., to refer the pending main motion to a committee), which requires the details discussed on pages 171-172. It is these details that can be offered by way of suggestions (such as "to be appointed by the chair" or "consisting of three members", etc.), prompted by the chair when the necessary details are lacking.
  13. Shmuel Gerber

    Presenting Motions

    See FAQ 1. However, regardless of whether or not it was in order for the chairman to make a motion, it is too late to raise a point of order about it after the fact, and the vote on the motion remains in effect.
  14. This raises the obvious question of what happens if, at a special meeting called for an unrelated purpose and to which none of the actions involved are incidental, a new point of order is raised that the chair's ruling on the previous point of order is null and void. The chair would have to say something like, "The point of order is well taken and, for the same reason, is out of order at this meeting, so the point of order is not well taken."
  15. Shmuel Gerber

    Ex officio in the Fall 2018 NP Vol. 80 No. 1

    You raise an interesting question. Perhaps they should be called "ex ex-officio" members.
×