Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'previous question'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • RONR Message Board – Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised
    • General Discussion
    • Advanced Discussion
    • The Robert’s Rules Website
  • About the Message Board
    • Questions or Comments about the Message Board
  • Archive
    • Archived Discussions (2010)

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location:


Interests

Found 11 results

  1. RONR (12th ed) 16.2 states that the adoption of Previous Question does not prevent incidental motions. After Previous Question has been adopted for a series of motions on a consent calendar, is it in order for one member to request to remove items from the consent calendar prior to the vote on the remainder?
  2. A: I move that we paint the meeting room red and buy a new gavel. B: I call for a separate vote on buying a new gavel. Chair: We will have a separate vote on buying a new gavel. The question is on the motion that we paint the meeting room red. C: I move to strike out "red" and insert "green." D: I move the previous question on all pending questions. [Adopted] Question, has the previous question been ordered for buying a new gavel? I.e., is it pending? The explanation of "immediately pending" on page 60 pertains to main motions in connection with subsidiary motions, but the e
  3. Is the motion to end debate (previous question) in order even if everyone in the meeting has not taken the floor?
  4. "In order that there may be no interference with the assembly's having the benefit of its committees' matured judgment, motions to close or limit debate are not allowed in committees" (RONR 11th ed., p. 500, ll. 18-21). Q1: Can this rule be suspended? Q2a: If not, by what cited rule / principle, on pp. 263-264, or elsewhere? Q2b: If it can be suspended, does the p. 261, l. 15 rule ("no rule protecting a minority of a particular size can be suspended in the face of a negative vote as large as the minority protected by the rule") cause Suspend to require at least one more vote
  5. When it comes to a 2/3 majority, I understand that it is 2/3+1. However, let's say I have a chamber of 20, would I round up to 15 or round down to 14?
  6. I recently came across the following test question 25. The subsidiary motion for the Previous Question can be applied to an undebatable motion if a member wanted to a. stop an amendment.b. not allow members to ask questions.c. delete a question asked by a member that is recorded in the minutes of the previous meeting.d. make a motion to allow the assembly to debate it. The correct answer was marked C. Is that really correct? I remember reading in RONR that the previous question can be applied to fix time to which to ajourn to prevent the making of the motion and I can't even remember reading
  7. If a question is capable of standing as three separate parts, can one motion to divide the question divide it into 3 parts or only 2? Slightly related, if a resolution is being considered by paragraph and the previous question is moved and adopted, does it force a vote on the entire resolution as a whole at that point?
  8. I was reading RONR 11th Ed. and was confused by Page 129, lines 33-35. This section seems to indicate that, upon the failure of a motion to Postpone Indefinitely, voting begins immediately on the main motion. My confusion emerges from the fact that, upon the failure of the PI motion, I would have thought that debate would recommence, if any members wished to do so. Only when debate was exhausted, or (with a 2/3 affirmative vote) a motion of Previous Question is passed would the main motion be put to the assembly for voting. The way lines 33-35 are written, the failure of the PI motion se
  9. Would it generally be considered improper or not in the spirit of Roberts Rules to "call the question" immediately, i.e. to prevent any discussion or debate or discussion at all? I understand that the 2/3 vote requirement protects against gross abuse, but isn't "calling the question" intended to be used to end debate because it appears there has been sufficient opportunity for pros and cons and further debate will not really be productive. Is it respectful to have the attitude of "we have the votes so lets prevent any debate".
  10. Guest

    Previous Question

    Our custom has been that only those who have not spoken on a particular motion can "Move the previous question" (or "call the question" as it is often expressed). Is there a basis for our custom in RROO? Thank you
  11. Hello, My student association is more or less locked in to being a member of the Canadian Federation of Students as result of Bylaw amendments made after we joined (though that is another matter). At the regular general meetings of the organization, our attempts to effect change are constantly thwarted. Other delegations, on the advice of their staff, repeatedly call the question on any motion put forward by my association or by others who share our views immediately after the motion has been made and motivated to and then immediately vote our motions down. We have plead with other delegatio
×
×
  • Create New...