Shmuel Gerber

The purpose of the footnote on page 643 is to dispel the idea, which is untrue (at least since the publication of the 11th edition of RONR), that an assembly cannot adopt a motion of censure against a member or officer unless there has been a disciplinary process and the "accused" has been found guilty. However, since you are so fervently enamored of this idea, I can understand your reluctance to be dissuaded from it by a mere footnote. Edited to put "accused" in quotation marks.

But, Jeff, this has nothing to do with your original question. Even if the nominating committee is permitted to nominate as many candidates on the "slate" as ask to be put on it, that has no bearing on whether yet more nominations may later be taken from the floor.

RONR does not define the term "slate of prospective officers", but it does note that commonly the nominating committee nominates only one candidate for each office. I think most people would understand that a slate consists of a list of one nominee for each office or position, in which case it would be improper for it to nominate more than one according to your bylaws.

Well, that's what you get for trying to combine "geranium against the wall", "dash of cold water in the face", and "bylaws's" (what is that orthographic monstrosity?) into the same paragraph.

"If a board or committee meeting is adjourned without any provision having been made for future meetings, the next meeting is held at the call of the chairman (see also pp. 499, 501)." (RONR, 11th ed., p. 238, ll. 4-7) (Please look out for alligators when coming down off the high horse.)