Motion passed

[Guest informed]

A motion was presented to reschedule a meeting, because of interuptions by a person the chair deemed ineligible to attend, seconded and passed by majority vote. Shortly after the vote, the chair entertained another member's request to continue with the meeting and called for a vote on requesting those in favor of conftinuing the meeting to raise their hands. A count was taken for the opposers, as well. This time the vote favored the people who wanted to continue the meeting. The meeting proceeded. Is this legal?

[Guest Nancy N.]

(Setting legality aside ...)

If I understand the scenario provided by charitably soi-disant Original Poster Guest_informed correctly, the assembly adopted a motion to schedule a follow-up meeting (technically, Fixed the Time to Which to Adjourn, as we 18th-century purists like to call it, in our witenagemots), but then they sorta weren't sure if the current meeting had been stopped, ended, terminated, adjourned, by that motion's adoption. So they made a motion and adopted it, to affirm that they were, indeed, continuing their meeting, as well as having scheduled a follow-up ("adjourned") meeting to finish whatever they couldn't accomplish here and now.

My head hurts already. Let's start with this: Guest-informed, is that a fair assessment of what happened?

1.

[David A Foulkes]

Did you actually finish all the business you needed to at this first meeting? And what of the disruptive person?