Innuendo as personal attack?

[Guest Curious]

Lets say a person on a board has a personal vendetta or grudge that they are playing out in public against another board member.

If this person, during a meeting, says things like... "after all the things you've done" (said in such a way that implies something bad) or "you've done a lot of morally questionable things" to or about a specific person, but refuses to define these things and also refuses to stop saying such things about this specific person in a meeting who is taking damage because of these things, meaning their public image and self esteem is being negatively impacted by these statements, is that considered a personal attack?

If so, is it the presiding officer's duty to stop such outbursts?

If not, do any of you have suggestions about what to do?

[Richard Brown]

Yes, it is the presiding officer's duty to stop such personal attacks.   They are a clear breach of decorum.

 

If the presiding officer fails to take action on his own, any member may call the member to order or raise a point of order to the chair that the member's remarks are out of order as they constitute a personal attack and are a breach of decorum.

 

See pages 645-646 of RONR.

[Guest Guest]

Yes, it is the presiding officer's duty to stop such personal attacks. They are a clear breach of decorum.

If the presiding officer fails to take action on his own, any member may call the member to order or raise a point of order to the chair that the member's remarks are out of order as they constitute a personal attack and are a breach of decorum.

See pages 645-646 of RONR.

Should the presiding officer wait for it to happen again before he calls the person to order, or would having a word with the person before the next meeting be better since it has already happened twice?

[Richard Brown]

There is nothing wrong with the president having a word with the member in private about the matter before the next meeting.  In that discussion, he might consider giving the member a polite warning that such behavior will not be tolerated and that he will  be publicly called to order next time it happens at a meeting.  Depending on how the conversation goes, the president might point out that other consequences can follow if the behavior continues.

 

It is possible that the member does even realize that personal attacks of the type he has been making are out of order at a meeting.

[Guest Rob]

How about when personnel attacks are done via email against the board members?

[Richard Brown]

How about when personnel attacks are done via email against the board members?

Then no violation of the rules of decorum in debate has taken place.  However, the other members may perceive this sort of action as unbecoming a member of the society, or as harassment, etc, and take appropriate disciplinary action.

 

See Chapter XX in RONR re disciplinary procedures.  it's 26 pages of detailed procedures.

[Guest Guest]

Is acknowledging that someone has made a personal attack, a personal attack in itself?

It may be that the person that has made the personal attack will become highly offended that such a suggestion is made, and will try to reverse the situation to paint themselves as the victim.

[Shmuel Gerber]

Any objections to words spoken in debate must be raised at the time the words are spoken. Afterwards, it is too late to mention it.

[Richard Brown]

Any objections to words spoken in debate must be raised at the time the words are spoken. Afterwards, it is too late to mention it.

Even privately in a conversation with the offending member to suggest that he refrain from such conduct in the future? 

[Josh Martin]

Is acknowledging that someone has made a personal attack, a personal attack in itself?

Raising a Point of Order that another member has violated decorum is not, in and of itself, a violation of decorum.

[Guest Guest]

Let's say someone in the meeting just said a thing, and someone else starts off with, or remarks with something like: "Wow, rude!" or "I thought that was really rude." in regards to what the person might have just said or done, or demonstrates some other type of display of  personal reaction to something.

What category does that fall into? To suddenly make one's personal feelings about a thing known aloud (whether one has the floor or not) within a context of a meeting... especially if emotionally charged and or has nothing to do with the topic at hand...but more with how something was said or how information was delivered.

[Guest Guest]

Let's say someone in the meeting just said a thing, and someone else starts off with, or remarks with something like: "Wow, rude!" or "I thought that was really rude." in regards to what the person might have just said or done, or demonstrates some other type of display of  personal reaction to something.

What category does that fall into? To suddenly make one's personal feelings about a thing known aloud (whether one has the floor or not) within a context of a meeting... especially if emotionally charged and or has nothing to do with the topic at hand...but more with how something was said or how information was delivered.

...or who delivered it.

[Josh Martin]

Let's say someone in the meeting just said a thing, and someone else starts off with, or remarks with something like: "Wow, rude!" or "I thought that was really rude." in regards to what the person might have just said or done, or demonstrates some other type of display of  personal reaction to something.

What category does that fall into? To suddenly make one's personal feelings about a thing known aloud (whether one has the floor or not) within a context of a meeting... especially if emotionally charged and or has nothing to do with the topic at hand...but more with how something was said or how information was delivered.

 

Making remarks such as "Wow, rude!" or "I thought that was really rude." are improper. They are not germane to the pending question, are indecorous, and do nothing to help the situation (and may make it worse). The situation is even worse if the member makes such remarks when he does not have the floor, since he is then disturbing the assembly and potentially interrupting another speaker in debate. If a member believes that another member has violated the rules of decorum, the proper course of action is to raise a Point of Order.

[Guest Guest]

There was another incident where the presiding officer corrected a member by saying "please address the chair instead of another member" or "please raise your hand to be recognised" or some other minor correction and the person replied (to the chair):

"Oh so now I'm in school again?"

What do you think of that exchange as far as decorum goes?

[jstackpo]

Sounds as though the person ought to be, certainly.

 

Next time he can try "So's your old man..."

 

If I were chairman, I'd just ignore the person as best I could. Or send him to the principal's office.

[Josh Martin]

There was another incident where the presiding officer corrected a member by saying "please address the chair instead of another member" or "please raise your hand to be recognised" or some other minor correction and the person replied (to the chair):

"Oh so now I'm in school again?"

What do you think of that exchange as far as decorum goes?

 

The presiding officer's remarks were entirely proper, but the member's response was not.