Engaging others in debate

[scawthon]

We have a member that debates using many speculative questions directed at all other members; what if ...., and waits for someone else to answer.  Ususally, everyone wants to answer and we go around and around never ending the discussion.  Is this an out of order tactic?  I thought the person should make their case on their own, siting what ever facts or references they have on why or why not a motion should be adopted.

[jstackpo]

It worked for Socrates (although it got him in a bit of trouble eventually).

 

As long as he sticks to the speaking rules (no more than 10 minutes (!) per speech, no second time until others have had their first time, no third time at all, &c.)  RONR has no problem.  But the chair will have to enforce those rules or you be going round and round for a long time.

[Edgar Guest]

We have a member that debates using many speculative questions directed at all other members; what if ...., and waits for someone else to answer. 

 

Strictly speaking, all remarks should be directed to the chair. Which can lead to some convoluted locutions (e.g. Mr. Chairman, would the right honorable gentleman from Apt. 3G permit me to ask him a question?").

 

The type of debate you describe seems more appropriate for a (small) committee.

[scawthon]

does robert' rules state that perons are only allowed to talk twice for a 10 minute duration unless a motion is made to change it for that meeting?

[Gary Novosielski]

We have a member that debates using many speculative questions directed at all other members; what if ...., and waits for someone else to answer.  Ususally, everyone wants to answer and we go around and around never ending the discussion.  Is this an out of order tactic?  I thought the person should make their case on their own, siting what ever facts or references they have on why or why not a motion should be adopted.

 

It's fine to ask questions in debate but they're typically rhetorical in nature, asking the listener to consider the question, but the speaker should typically not be waiting for a reply.  If someone asks a question of another member in debate the chair should remind the member to direct his remarks to the chair, and not to other members.

 

This is distinct from the Request for Information, which is a bona fide question to gain information that one does not actually have.  I would have to say that it is far more usual (and proper) for members who do not have the floor to be asking questions of the person speaking.   ("Will the member yield for a question?")   

 

In neither case is anyone compelled to answer the question, unless it would be a duty of their office to supply that information, and even then, they might not be expected to have the information available on the spot.

[Shmuel Gerber]

does robert' rules state that perons are only allowed to talk twice for a 10 minute duration unless a motion is made to change it for that meeting?

Not exactly. It's twice per motion per day, with a maximum of 10 minutes per speech.

[Gary Novosielski]

does robert' rules state that perons are only allowed to talk twice for a 10 minute duration unless a motion is made to change it for that meeting?

 

That's the general rule, yes, twice on any one question, for 10 minutes each time.  Also, the member should not be recognized for a second speech until everyone else who wishes to has made one.

[George Mervosh]

That's the general rule, yes, twice on any one question, for 10 minutes each time.  Also, the member should not be recognized for a second speech until everyone else who wishes to has made one.

 

 

Not exactly. It's twice per motion per day, with a maximum of 10 minutes per speech.

 

Mr. Novosielski missed two words from Mr. Gerber's reply.

[Thomas Ralph]

I think in the first instance a reminder from the chair that the speaker is expected to address only the chair would help in this scenario.