Guest Jari Honora Posted June 16, 2011 at 04:53 PM Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 at 04:53 PM Within one particular association of which I am a member, the president has a habit of asking the recording secretary to send her the minutes after they are written so that she can review and/or proofread them. As is normal, the membership accepts or rejects the minutes at the next meeting. Is the middle step of sending them to the presiding officer for review done elsewhere or should it be done at all? I would say that it could potentially lead to doctored minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 16, 2011 at 04:59 PM Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 at 04:59 PM Oh, it's done. There's no rule against it. (I'm often tempted to suggest that the minutes be reviewed by the Club Editor rather than the president, but I usually forbear ... darn it, you sucked me out.) If it helps the secretary clean up the minutes between meetings, what harm is done? As long as no "doctoring" (nice term) is involved, it looks to me like volunteer help. And if the secretary doesn't want any help, she can just say "No thank you."[Edited to ramble some] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted June 16, 2011 at 05:08 PM Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 at 05:08 PM As is normal, the membership accepts or rejects the minutes at the next meeting. So why worry about "doctoring"?I'd bet GcT and Fluffy lunch on Flatbush Avenue that the minutes contain far more than RONR says they should contain. If they look like the sample minutes in RONR, doctoring is hardly possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 16, 2011 at 05:28 PM Report Share Posted June 16, 2011 at 05:28 PM I'll say. The one time I was ever invited (allowed) to take the minutes, there was, to my astonishment, uproar at the next meeting, during the reading of the minutes, on hearing my repeated accurate reporting that "Then Gary Tesser gave a great speech." Given this ungrateful reception, I generously proposed striking out that sentence in every instance. You know what? they instead voted to reject the minutes entirely, and directed the president to construct a better version, since, having been absent at that previous meeting, he could be impartial.[forever tweaking] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest laura ford Posted June 19, 2011 at 07:36 PM Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 at 07:36 PM I'll say. The one time I was ever invited (allowed) to take the minutes, there was, to my astonishment, uproar at the next meeting, during the reading of the minutes, on hearing my repeated accurate reporting that "Then Gary Tesser gave a great speech." Given this ungrateful reception, I generously proposed striking out that sentence in every instance. You know what? they instead voted to reject the minutes entirely, and directed the president to construct a better version, since, having been absent at that previous meeting, he could be impartial.[forever tweaking] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted June 19, 2011 at 09:42 PM Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 at 09:42 PM (Ms Ford, and others: On this website, you have to hit "Add Reply" right AFTER you have typed in your own post. Otherwise it just looks as if you think what Gary Tesser wrote last week deserves repeating.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted June 20, 2011 at 03:13 PM Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 at 03:13 PM (Ms Ford, and others: On this website, you have to hit "Add Reply" right AFTER you have typed in your own post. Otherwise it just looks as if you think what Gary Tesser wrote last week deserves repeating.)The powers that be on this website feel your postings are so deserving that you are memorialized on the old forum as having the last post ever. Ms. Ford copying your reply is therefore hardly shocking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted June 20, 2011 at 07:56 PM Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 at 07:56 PM (Ms Ford, and others: On this website, you have to hit "Add Reply" right AFTER you have typed in your own post. Otherwise it just looks as if you think what Gary Tesser wrote last week deserves repeating.)You mean it doesn't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Wynn Posted June 20, 2011 at 08:52 PM Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 at 08:52 PM Within one particular association of which I am a member, the president has a habit of asking the recording secretary to send her the minutes after they are written so that she can review and/or proofread them.There's nothing wrong with the asking. Officers should cordially work together, whenever possible. As is normal, the membership accepts or rejects the minutes at the next meeting.The membership shouldn't be asked to accept or reject the minutes. After the minutes are read, the chair should call for corrections. When there are no (further) corrections, the minutes should be declared approved. See RONR(10th ed.), p. 343 for the proper procedure. Is the middle step of sending them to the presiding officer for review done elsewhere or should it be done at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.