Guest GLS Posted August 30, 2017 at 08:57 PM Report Share Posted August 30, 2017 at 08:57 PM RONR 11 ed pp 97-99: "Except as authorized in the bylaws, the business of an organization or board can be validly transacted only at a regular or properly called meeting—that is, as defined on pages 81–82, a single official gathering in one room or area—of the assembly of its members at which a quorum is present." Could anyone help me determine: 1) Whether this ("organization or board") applies to a convention of delegates as defined later in the text 2) Whether a convention's Committee on Standing Rules could permit electronic meeting if it is not provided (or disallowed) by the bylaws, or whether other special rules of order pertaining to this being a "special meeting" (a special convention) might do the same Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieu H. Huynh Posted August 30, 2017 at 10:44 PM Report Share Posted August 30, 2017 at 10:44 PM 1 hour ago, Guest GLS said: RONR 11 ed pp 97-99: "Except as authorized in the bylaws, the business of an organization or board can be validly transacted only at a regular or properly called meeting—that is, as defined on pages 81–82, a single official gathering in one room or area—of the assembly of its members at which a quorum is present." Could anyone help me determine: 1) Whether this ("organization or board") applies to a convention of delegates as defined later in the text Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted August 30, 2017 at 10:56 PM Report Share Posted August 30, 2017 at 10:56 PM 1 hour ago, Guest GLS said: 2) Whether a convention's Committee on Standing Rules could permit electronic meeting if it is not provided (or disallowed) by the bylaws, or whether other special rules of order pertaining to this being a "special meeting" (a special convention) might do the same In my opinion, no. In RONR, this is one of those things that must be in the bylaws (p. 97). Also see the footnote on p. 16. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted August 31, 2017 at 04:25 AM Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 at 04:25 AM Are these "yes"'s and "no"'s in agreement, or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted August 31, 2017 at 09:15 AM Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 at 09:15 AM 4 hours ago, Gary c Tesser said: Are these "yes"'s and "no"'s in agreement, or not? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted August 31, 2017 at 03:59 PM Report Share Posted August 31, 2017 at 03:59 PM 11 hours ago, Gary c Tesser said: Are these "yes"'s and "no"'s in agreement, or not? Well, I agree with HHH's answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nancy N. Posted September 2, 2017 at 03:44 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2017 at 03:44 PM On 8/31/2017 at 0:25 AM, Gary c Tesser said: Are these "yes"'s and "no"'s in agreement, or not? On 8/31/2017 at 5:15 AM, Daniel H. Honemann said: Yes. On 8/31/2017 at 11:59 AM, J. J. said: Well, I agree with HHH's answer. Well I thing I better rejoin the NAP and the AIP and thereby find out why I don't get it. (Me and that alleged Tesser person) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nancy N. Posted September 2, 2017 at 03:56 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2017 at 03:56 PM On 8/30/2017 at 6:56 PM, J. J. said: In my opinion, no. In RONR, this is one of those things that must be in the bylaws (p. 97). Also see the footnote on p. 16. On 8/31/2017 at 11:59 AM, J. J. said: Well, I agree with HHH's answer. OK, then, why, please? -- given, to resolve, then, the apparent inconsistency? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 2, 2017 at 03:59 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2017 at 03:59 PM 13 minutes ago, Guest Nancy N. said: Well I thing I better rejoin the NAP and the AIP and thereby find out why I don't get it. (Me and that alleged Tesser person) What makes you thing that'll help? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted September 2, 2017 at 05:41 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2017 at 05:41 PM 1 hour ago, Guest Nancy N. said: Well I thing I better rejoin the NAP and the AIP and thereby find out why I don't get it. (Me and that alleged Tesser person) 1 1 hour ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: What makes you thing that'll help? Reading between the lines, Mr. H, might we conclude that you will not likely be at the NAP convention next week? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 2, 2017 at 06:36 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2017 at 06:36 PM 31 minutes ago, Richard Brown said: Reading between the lines, Mr. H, might we conclude that you will not likely be at the NAP convention next week? No, I won't be at the NAP convention, but I meant nothing more by my response to Nancy other than the fact that being a member of NAP isn't apt to assist in recognizing that, when answers are given to entirely different questions, answering "yes" to one and "no" to the other does not necessarily give rise to an inconsistency. Besides, I liked that "thing" bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted September 2, 2017 at 06:58 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2017 at 06:58 PM 21 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: Besides, I liked that "thing" bit. I got a chuckle out of the "thing" bit, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted September 2, 2017 at 11:34 PM Report Share Posted September 2, 2017 at 11:34 PM I, on the other hand, will be there. I hadn't been planning on it, but then I missed the state convention and therefore was elected to a delegate position, and figured "why not?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted September 3, 2017 at 12:11 AM Report Share Posted September 3, 2017 at 12:11 AM I was planning on going but some things have come up that might cause me to have to cancel. I'm supposed to be there for a meeting of the bylaws committee Thursday evening. Still hoping to make it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted September 3, 2017 at 02:59 PM Report Share Posted September 3, 2017 at 02:59 PM 22 hours ago, Guest Nancy N. said: OK, then, why, please? -- given, to resolve, then, the apparent inconsistency? HHH answered this question: "1) Whether this ("organization or board") applies to a convention of delegates as defined later in the text " "This" refers to the passage requiring electronic meetings to be authorized in the bylaws. HHH correctly stated the rule would apply to a convention delegates. The second question was: "Whether a convention's Committee on Standing Rules could permit electronic meeting if it is not provided (or disallowed) by the bylaws, or whether other special rules of order pertaining to this being a "special meeting" (a special convention) might do the same." Completely consistent with HHH's question, I answered that question as "no." You could not circumvent the statement in RONR that says electronic meetings had to be authorized in the bylaws, even if you would put that in convention standing rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary c Tesser Posted September 12, 2017 at 09:33 PM Report Share Posted September 12, 2017 at 09:33 PM Sheesh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts