Considerations of motions

[Guest Mitchell]

Howmany times can a motion be considered in the same meeting

[jstackpo]

Normally, once.      

 

Give us a little more detail and we might be able to say something about the "abnormal" possibilities.

[Edgar Guest]

Normally, once.

The motion to Reconsider isn't "normal"?

[jstackpo]

Correct, of course, but it is more than just considering a motion twice in the same meeting.  This latter is how I read the OP's question (and why I asked for more information).

[Josh Martin]

The motion to Reconsider isn't "normal"?

In most assemblies? Not really.

[Gary Novosielski]

The motion to Reconsider isn't "normal"?

Nah.  Ask yourself how many times we get questions about reconsidering a motion, and how many of those times the answer has anything whatsoever to do with the (relatively rare) motion to Reconsider.

 

You can call it uncommon rather than "abnormal", but it's certainly not one of your truly mainstream motions.

[Edgar Guest]

You can call it uncommon rather than "abnormal", but it's certainly not one of your truly mainstream motions.

 

I agree that it's often misunderstood but perhaps no more than, say, the motion to lay on the table.

[Josh Martin]

I agree that it's often misunderstood but perhaps no more than, say, the motion to lay on the table.

Quite so, but I think this supports Gary's point. We quite frequently get questions about "tabling" something when the intended motion is Postpone to a Certain Time or Postpone Indefinitely. It is quite unusual to get a question about the proper motion to Lay on the Table.

[Gary Novosielski]

And even the proper motion to Lay on the Table, as FAQ #12 points out, "is rarely needed, and hence seldom in order."

 

That's true for "ordinary societies", so if it's being used properly on a regular basis, either the society or the circumstances are at least somewhat "extraordinary".

[Gary c Tesser]

Nah.  Ask yourself how many times we get questions about reconsidering a motion, and how many of those times the answer has anything whatsoever to do with the (relatively rare) motion to Reconsider.

 

You can call it uncommon rather than "abnormal", but it's certainly not one of your truly mainstream motions.

 

And yet, it is distinctly not uncommon for a group to, as RONR-IB puts it, "change its mind" (p. vi); just as it is often that assemblies find themselves desiring to set the pending business aside, if not actually squelch* it, though they often do not know what the proper terminology is.

 

(I do think we're all on the same page here, notwithstanding quibbling, though I can't really keep track of what the quibbling's about.)

____________

* I actually saw the "motion to squelch" used, somewhere last week -- I'm pretty sure it wasn't on Sons of Anarchy's final episode, though that was interesting enough though there wasn't much of its occasional intriguing dollop of parliamentary procedure.  I should look it up.

[Edgar Guest]

Quite so, but I think this supports Gary's point. 

 

Well, my point, which I'll make more explicit this time, is that saying that a motion can only be considered once, "normally", when the perfectly legitimate, if often misunderstood, motion to Reconsider is available, seems a tad misleading incomplete.

[Gary Novosielski]

I forgot what side I was on, at this point.