Eli Zupke

Thank you for your responses! I forgot how thorough people tend to respond on this forum, which is something I certainly appreciate. I did end up directing that person here, so hopefully they get some useful answers. I did see that, but I didn't think it answered my question. After looking over it more thoroughly, I suppose the answer is actually in the end of the first sentence. I probably overlooked that because I was searching for something that looked set of rules more definitively outlining what is or isn't allowed, and I didn't see something formatted like that.

Someone asked me about what alternatives to Robert's Rules might better fit their organization. I'm considering directing them to this forum, but I'm not sure whether that discussion would be on-topic. I expect that how suited the topic is for this forum drops off very quickly as the subject gets further away from Robert's Rules specifically, but I couldn't find any rules for this forum to verify that.

That button is fairly easy to miss. Funny how in this case the fully expanded box is actually shorter than the unexpanded box.

There is a week's delay between nomination and election, and this is when people are changing their mind. I think this is an excellent idea, and I'll suggest it to the organization. Thank you everyone for the answers!

Our organization's national constitution contains the following provisions (emphasis mine): I'm almost certain that the usage of the phrase "regularly called meeting" here means that we could not hold a special meeting to elect delegates to convention. Is this a correct interpretation?

For my organization's elections, our bylaws require nominations to be from the floor. It is customary during nominations for each nomination to be immediately accepted or declined by the nominee, and nominees who accept have the option to decline in the time immediately after the meeting. Our bylaws and other relevant governing documents are silent on this issue, and I couldn't find anything in Robert's Rules on this. Does this custom conflict with Robert's Rules? If not, are there any reasons why we might want to move away from this custom?

Yes. It is in the article regarding chapters at the university level. The national chapter (the organization that holds national conventions) has its own article, where the order of business for conventions is defined.

Thank you all for your responses! This has been incredibly helpful. Thanks, this perfect. I'll take this to our chapter's Jurisdiction Committee, and we'll see where it goes from there.

Well, technically the position is called something else in our organization, and has other duties as well. But yes, they should really have a copy of the rules.

Yes, that is my suggestion. 3 copies of the full rules for President, Parliamentarian, and one as a spare, and then a copy of In Brief for everyone.

The speech is in favor of the organization purchasing copies of Robert's Rules for the members (who otherwise do not own them), so unfortunately there is little chance of that.

The national constitution of my fraternity contains the following provision: In addition, our chapter bylaws have the following provision allowing the national constitution to take effect: In my mind, the provision in the national constitution clearly overrides RONR (12th ed.) 41:39, which gives the power of changing the order of business only to the assembly. In addition, "when deemed advisable" seems to me like an incredibly broad statement. I think this is a provision that needs to be struck or altered. The opportunity for this is at the national convention this summer, where we may send a member to sit on the Jurisdiction Committee that drafts amendments to the national constitution. By this time, I will have graduated and will therefore be ineligible to serve on this committee. With the understanding that some of these questions may only be answered by our organization, I have the following questions: Who determines what counts as "when deemed advisable"? What would the Chapter President changing the order of business look like (as in, what would be said by who)? Can our bylaws specify a different order of business, either by adding items or changing the order of the items? What kind of alterations to this provision in the national constitution may be desirable? Can I make a motion stating that our chapter (specifically, whoever we send to the Jurisdiction Committee) should try to get this changed? What would such a motion look like?

The custom for the local chapter of my fraternity has been for officers and committee chairmen to deliver their reports to the assembly extemporaneously. It is my understanding that this violates the requirement in Robert's Rules that all reports (unless they are very short) must be submitted in writing. Similarly, the minutes written by the secretary each meeting include summaries of discussion and reports, whereas it is my understanding that (unless otherwise permitted by the bylaws) the minutes should only contain a summary of actions taken. Our chapter bylaws and the bylaws/constitution of both the regional and national components of the fraternity are silent on both issues. These customs are a result of a general lack of knowledge of Robert's Rules in our chapter, which I intend to fix. However, I am on generally good terms with the other people in the organization, and I want to accomplish this in a way that is as non confrontational as possible. I expect some resistance; after I notified the chairperson of my intended course of action, they let me know that the executive board had some concerns, so I will be meeting with them soon. In the meantime, my current plan for the next meeting is to bring this matter up by using the motion to suspend the rules, thereby allowing us to continue the way we are used to without major disruption, while at the same time bringing up that the way we conduct business is improper. My questions are as follows: Am I correct in my reading of Robert's Rules that the two customs I mentioned violate Robert's Rules? Is the course of action I intend on taking acceptable under the rules? Is it acceptable under Robert's Rules to make one motion to suspend the rules to receive all reports delivered extemporaneously for a particular meeting? Is there a better course of action I can take to achieve my goals?

Thank you all for answering, this has been quite helpful!

Does RONR (12th ed.) 43:26 apply to pre-prepared speeches written by the speaking member? Am I allowed to object if someone has pre-written their speech? I'm asking because I'm writing a speech in favor of a motion that I plan to make, and I want to know whether I need to ask if any member objects to me reading the speech during debate.