-
Posts
4,475 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Shmuel Gerber
-
I think he is referring to the former practice wherein a member who did not respond to call of the roll was not counted as being present for purposes of determining a quorum.
-
As wood I.
-
I can't imagine why anyone thought the latter half of this sentence necessary or useful.
-
If the debate is in the form of remarks not related to any pending motion, then yes you can rule such remarks out of order. You do not have the right to end the debate on a pending motion, nor to refuse recognition to a member attempting to make a motion.
-
It can be said to apply to all pending questions, because when the allotted time for consideration of the main motion expires, all pending questions will be put to a vote without further debate or amendment. (15:12) Is there some other example of how the last sentence of 15:11 would apply that you think is more clearly in order?
-
I think so, although perhaps it could be worded more clearly. The intention is to limit debate on the main motion and all secondary motions (that are pending or may become pending) so that a vote will be taken after no more than 20 minutes of debate.
-
Objecting to Consideration / Conflict of Interest
Shmuel Gerber replied to NateB's topic in General Discussion
Well it seems that in this organization everything from voting to quorum to ratification to conflict of interest is defined or handled differently than in RONR, so I'm not sure we can be of much help here. -
Objecting to Consideration / Conflict of Interest
Shmuel Gerber replied to NateB's topic in General Discussion
A quorum is the number of members who must be present at a meeting in order to conduct business. It has nothing to do with the number of members who voted. You seem to be dealing with some sort of online election system with its own rules, so I have no idea what a quorum means in this context. -
Objecting to Consideration / Conflict of Interest
Shmuel Gerber replied to NateB's topic in General Discussion
This sentence does not make sense to me. There's no such thing as a candidate who did not meet quorum. -
I agree with Mr. Martin's explanation. In this sentence, "those motions" are the motions to Commit or to Postpone. So when the book says, "the remaining questions may be postponed or committed at the time those motions come to a vote," it simply means that the motions to Commit or Postpone are voted on as they normally would be — despite the adoption of the motion to Limit Debate — and, if they are adopted, they cause the remaining questions in the series (the main motion and the other pending motions adhering to the main motion) to be committed or postponed. For example, suppose a main motion and an amendment are pending, and it is moved to postpone the pending questions to the next meeting. While all these motions are pending, it is moved and adopted to limit debate on the main motion to 20 minutes. The same motion to Postpone could not have been moved after adoption of this motion to Limit Debate. However, it was moved beforehand and remains pending. The last sentence of 15:11 is telling us that, in this situation, the main motion and the amendment can still be postponed to the next meeting by the assembly's voting in favor of the pending motion to Postpone.
-
But RONR does not discuss this particular situation, where the assembly is attempting to fill 50 delegate seats, and using the results of that election as a ranking mechanism for up to 50 additional alternates. I think the closest parallel that is discussed in RONR (46:34) is the election of directors with varying terms, in which those with more votes are given the longer terms.
-
I don't see where the book says that the alternates are ranked in order of the number of votes received — although that is one possibility for the method of ranking. It also does not say that the number of alternates should always equal the number of delegates; it says the numbers frequently are equal.
-
Formal definition of "out of order"?
Shmuel Gerber replied to Will Braswell's topic in General Discussion
To (legally) obtain the text of RONR, you need to buy (or borrow) the book, which is available in several print and electronic editions. https://robertsrules.com/purchase/ Regarding your question: 4:16 "In principle, the chair must state the question on a motion immediately after it has been made and seconded, unless he is obliged to rule that the motion is not in order or unless, in his opinion, the wording is not clear." 4:17 "Rules and explanations relating to the conditions under which various motions are not in order will be found particularly in 5, 6, and 7; in 10:26–27; and in the first three of the “Standard Descriptive Characteristics” given in the sections on each of the parliamentary motions (11–37). When a member who has legitimately obtained the floor offers a motion which is not in order, the chair may be able, in certain instances, to suggest an alternative motion which would be in order and would carry out the desired intent to the satisfaction of the maker. If the chair is obliged to rule that the motion is not in order, he says, “The chair rules that the motion is not in order [or “is out of order”] because… [briefly stating the reason].” (He must not say, “You are out of order,” nor, “Your motion is out of order.” To state that a member is out of order implies that the member is guilty of a breach of decorum or other misconduct in a meeting; and even in such a case, the chair does not normally address the member in the second person. See 3:13; also 61.) If the chair rules that a motion is not in order, his decision is subject to an appeal to the judgment of the assembly. (For procedure regarding Appeal, see 24.)" -
Can a motion be made where amendments are not allowed
Shmuel Gerber replied to a topic in General Discussion
Why not just move to limit debate by forbidding the making of any amendments? -
A motion to limit debate has the effect of suspending the regular rules relating to debate insofar as the adopted limits are incompatible with such regular rules, but it certainly does not suspend the rules relating to itself and to all the other rules in the book. Therefore I do not think it is helpful to generally think of adopting a subsidiary motion to limit debate as adopting a motion to suspend the rules.
-
Approval of Meeting Minutes based on meeting type?
Shmuel Gerber replied to acc's topic in General Discussion
No need to suppose: 48:12 "Exceptions to the rule that minutes are approved at the next regular meeting (or at the next meeting within the session) arise when the next meeting will not be held within a quarterly time interval, when the term of a specified portion of the membership will expire before the start of the next meeting, or when, as at the final meeting of a convention, the assembly will be dissolved at the close of the present meeting. In any of these cases, minutes that have not been approved previously should be approved before final adjournment, or the assembly should authorize the executive board or a special committee to approve the minutes." -
Motion to Adjourn Skipping Voted On Agenda Items?
Shmuel Gerber replied to a topic in Advanced Discussion
No. This question answers itself. -
Motion to Adjourn Skipping Voted On Agenda Items?
Shmuel Gerber replied to a topic in Advanced Discussion
I think this may be where we disagree. It is not the adjournment previously set that is being taken up early. Rather, a new, earlier adjournment, is being moved. -
I'm with you so far. Now you've lost me. You just said that the subsidiary motion to limit debate was adopted. There is no actual suspension of the rules involved. There is no order suspending the rules and closing debate; there is only an order closing debate under the rules for that motion. I can think of no rule in RONR that precludes a motion to adjourn in this scenario. No. The motion to adjourn does not conflict with the motion limiting debate. Neither would a motion to postpone indefinitely, for the previous question, to lay on the table, or to take a recess.
-
Motion to Adjourn Skipping Voted On Agenda Items?
Shmuel Gerber replied to a topic in Advanced Discussion
I disagree. Where the rules specifically provide that the motion to adjourn is not privileged and cannot be made when another motion is pending, it would not be in order to raise it as a question of privilege. -
Quorum lost before ballot result is announced
Shmuel Gerber replied to Tomm's topic in General Discussion
What does the approval of the minutes have to do with the price of tea in China (or the proper announcement of the ballot vote)?