Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Shmuel Gerber

Administrators
  • Content Count

    2,361
  • 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. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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."
  4. 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.
  5. Shmuel Gerber

    Voiding action from prior meeting due to lack of quorum

    You might want to review this thread, which is not that far down the list of topics in the Advanced Discussion forum. In this particular context, I think it might be helpful to know what the basis was for determining that no quorum was present, and whether anything had changed in this regard between the first and second days of the convention. Was it simply a question of how many of the registered delegates came to each day's meeting, or was it that not enough people from the constituent units registered for the convention at all?
  6. The chair was correct. '. . . this motion usually is made in an unqualified form, such as "I move the previous question," and then it applies only to the immediately pending question.' (RONR, 11th ed., p. 199, ll. 7-12) 'The Previous Question is said to be exhausted (in reference to a particular order for it) when all of the motions on which it was ordered have been finally disposed of . . . After the Previous Question is exhausted, any remaining questions that come up again are open to debate and amendment just as if there had been no order for the Previous Question. ' (p. 204, ll. 13-26)
  7. Shmuel Gerber

    Can vs shall

    Some would say there is always the option to disobey. :-) But I agree with you: RONR uses these words according to their ordinary meanings. "Can" indicates ability, possibility, or permission. "Shall" indicates an instruction, mandate, or authoritative statement of a future fact.
  8. Shmuel Gerber

    Motion to approve, amend, withdraw, and refer

    It's true that there is no subsidiary motion "to approve." However, most meetings feature the approval of the minutes of the previous meeting, and RONR certainly has rules relating to a main motion to approve in other contexts, as on pages 124-125. Without knowing what type of assembly this is or what type of matter was brought before it, it's hard to know whether a motion to approve was appropriate -- and, if it was appropriate, whether a motion to amend was also appropriate.
  9. Shmuel Gerber

    Order of Precedence

    You're probably thinking of page 63, lines 1-5.
  10. Shmuel Gerber

    Order of Precedence

    And of course what I mean is that the motion to refer can be postponed together with the main motion. But it would be absurd to refer to a committee the question on postponing the main motion.
  11. Shmuel Gerber

    Non-agenda actions

    Yes, welcome. (Unless you're a spambot, in which case not welcome.)
  12. Shmuel Gerber

    'Show of Hands' Question

    With due respect to the self-described southpaws here, I don't see how being left-handed is any impediment to raising the right hand during a vote. In fact, this leaves your dominant hand free to take notes or do some other useful thing while all the righties are stuck just waiting for their votes to be recognized. I don't know where this practice came from, but I assume it is simply more practical, especially where the members are seated close to each other, than having members possibly randomly jamming their hands into or near each other, like when a right-handed person is seated to the left of a left-handed person at the dinner table.
  13. Shmuel Gerber

    Order of Precedence

    Yes. :-) Because a motion to refer can be postponed, but a motion to postpone cannot be referred. Because, aside from a recess or adjournment, an order of the day does not interfere with a question of privilege.
  14. Shmuel Gerber

    Seconding a motion (caveat)

    Wow. Y'all have so much comedic potential, we may just have to set up a cover charge for readers of the forum.
×