Louise Posted August 27, 2014 at 06:14 PM Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 at 06:14 PM An organization (of which I am not a member) has been allowing non-members to vote. (Instead of one vote per paid membership as per the bylaws, they have been allowing as many family members as are present at the meeting to also vote. Is this a continuing breach, or is it only an issue if the outcome of any give vote would be affected? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edgar Guest Posted August 27, 2014 at 06:32 PM Report Share Posted August 27, 2014 at 06:32 PM Is this a continuing breach, or is it only an issue if the outcome of any give vote would be affected? Well, It certainly seems to be an ongoing breach and the practice should be stopped immediately. But, yes, it only constitutes a "continuing" breach if the votes of non-members could have affected the outcome (and there's clear and convincing proof of that). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Transpower Posted August 28, 2014 at 12:54 PM Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 at 12:54 PM Just raise a point of order to end this practice. If you believe that previous motions have been passed improperly with the support of non-members, you can move to amend or rescind them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 28, 2014 at 08:26 PM Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 at 08:26 PM Just raise a point of order to end this practice. If you believe that previous motions have been passed improperly with the support of non-members, you can move to amend or rescind them. Amend or rescind something that's null and void? That's the transpower solution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted August 28, 2014 at 08:38 PM Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 at 08:38 PM Amend or rescind something that's null and void? That's the transpower solution? It would be my solution, too, unless there are incredibly accurate records available as how many ineligible voters voted on each of the motions that the current membership believes were improperly adopted. I doubt seriously that such records are available. Unless some of those previously adopted motions are causing problems, I think it best to just move on and make sure that only eligible voters vote on future motions. Long time no see, Gary! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louise Posted August 29, 2014 at 04:26 AM Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 at 04:26 AM Thanks, gentlemen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 29, 2014 at 10:28 AM Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 at 10:28 AM ... Long time no see, Gary! And I said to Louise yesterday; -- young brave puissant Louise -- where have you been??!? And she's only 23 or so! ANd she never went to San Antonio with me and you and George and who-all (Dr Seabold, absent, whined incessantly afterwards, "-did everybody go but me?-") in 2003! "Long time no see"??!? Who has been absent from the world's premier Internet parliamentary forum? (We might graciously ask, who instead (i.e., by implication, you) has been "having a life"?, as the cliche'd saying goes? (But then we might rejoinder, as the shirt-button or the t-shirt might say, real life is what we muddle through with when we don't feel smart enough to participate on the world's premier Internet parliamentary forum. (But the way to recover, or heal, from such feelings, is to read and type on the world's premier Internet parliamentary forum.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted August 29, 2014 at 12:57 PM Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 at 12:57 PM And I said to [Louise yesterday, where have you been??!? Lurking. And reading. And researching. And testing my knowledge and ability to apply it to real life situations. The forum is an excellent research tool. I've sent several friends and even a couple of clients to it. And then I found myself missing my old friends on here. I was going to take the RP exam at the NAP Training Conference earlier this month, but life and political campaigns kept interfering with my study schedule and I realized I wasn't quite ready for it. NAP has my money for it, though, so I'll be taking it soon! It was actually seeing Dan Seabold at the conference and joking and reminiscing about some of the fun times on the old forum that convinced me to get active on the forum again. I wish he would, too. Here's my commitment: I'll be a Registered Parliamentarian before the end of the year and a PRP by the end of next year. Or I'll give up my raffle tickets for the silver Porsche. Keep the pressure on me. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 29, 2014 at 01:25 PM Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 at 01:25 PM ...Here's my commitment: I'll be a Registered Parliamentarian before the end of the year and a PRP by the end of next year. Or I'll give up my raffle tickets for the silver Porsche. Keep the pressure on me. :- You do know that I, as an aspiring parliamentarian, have crocodiles. (I read about the need for it in The National Parliamentarian. In the regular Parliamentary Herpetology Section). So watch it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.