Guest Scott Fischer Posted February 3, 2018 at 08:03 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 08:03 PM "In cases where there seems to be no opposition in routine business or on questions of little importance, time can often be saved by the procedure of Unanimous consent," RONR (11th ed.), p. 54, ll. 13-15 Also, "If much hinges on the outcome, however, it is usually better to take a formal vote." RONR (11th ed.), p. 56, ll. 14-15 Can unanimous consent be used if something is of great importance or not routine, yet there is no apparent opposition and no objection is made? I realize it may not be the wisest course of action but the two quotes above seem to contradict each other. Any insight would be appreciated, more so if references bolstering said insight are given. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted February 3, 2018 at 08:07 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 08:07 PM 3 minutes ago, Guest Scott Fischer said: "In cases where there seems to be no opposition in routine business or on questions of little importance, time can often be saved by the procedure of Unanimous consent," RONR (11th ed.), p. 54, ll. 13-15 Also, "If much hinges on the outcome, however, it is usually better to take a formal vote." RONR (11th ed.), p. 56, ll. 14-15 Can unanimous consent be used if something is of great importance or not routine, yet there is no apparent opposition and no objection is made? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted February 3, 2018 at 08:17 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 08:17 PM 14 minutes ago, Guest Scott Fischer said: "In cases where there seems to be no opposition in routine business or on questions of little importance, time can often be saved by the procedure of Unanimous consent," RONR (11th ed.), p. 54, ll. 13-15 Also, "If much hinges on the outcome, however, it is usually better to take a formal vote." RONR (11th ed.), p. 56, ll. 14-15 Can unanimous consent be used if something is of great importance or not routine, yet there is no apparent opposition and no objection is made? I realize it may not be the wisest course of action but the two quotes above seem to contradict each other. Any insight would be appreciated, more so if references bolstering said insight are given. In what respect do they seem to contradict each other? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Fischer Posted February 3, 2018 at 10:00 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 10:00 PM 1 hour ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: In what respect do they seem to contradict each other? How can a question be of little importance yet much hinges on the outcome? So then, if unanimous consent is an allowable option even if the matter is not routine or is of importance why put those qualifiers in at all? Is a lack of objection, either because there is none or such is perceived to be futile, the actual indicator that unanimous consent is able to be used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted February 3, 2018 at 10:39 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 10:39 PM 39 minutes ago, Guest Scott Fischer said: How can a question be of little importance yet much hinges on the outcome? So then, if unanimous consent is an allowable option even if the matter is not routine or is of importance why put those qualifiers in at all? Is a lack of objection, either because there is none or such is perceived to be futile, the actual indicator that unanimous consent is able to be used? Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Fischer Posted February 3, 2018 at 11:13 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 11:13 PM 28 minutes ago, J. J. said: Yes. 3 hours ago, Richard Brown said: Yes. I realize I may seem a bit obtuse by asking, but can someone please explain why the line about "routine" or "little importance" is in there if it does not apply? I have searched the f.a.q. and a number of threads on this forum and cannot find why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted February 3, 2018 at 11:17 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 11:17 PM 1 hour ago, Guest Scott Fischer said: How can a question be of little importance yet much hinges on the outcome? It probably can't, and nothing in those two sentences you have referred to indicates otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted February 3, 2018 at 11:48 PM Report Share Posted February 3, 2018 at 11:48 PM 32 minutes ago, Guest Scott Fischer said: I realize I may seem a bit obtuse by asking, but can someone please explain why the line about "routine" or "little importance" is in there if it does not apply? I have searched the f.a.q. and a number of threads on this forum and cannot find why. "Great Importance" is the eye of the beholder. To me, if nobody objects, the motion is not one of "great importance" in the eyes of the assembly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Geiger Posted February 4, 2018 at 12:28 AM Report Share Posted February 4, 2018 at 12:28 AM So I guess the question is: what can't unanimous consent be used for? The only things that leap to mind are situations where the bylaws mandate a specific form of vote (ballot or roll call)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Who's Coming to Dinner Posted February 4, 2018 at 02:11 AM Report Share Posted February 4, 2018 at 02:11 AM 6 hours ago, Guest Scott Fischer said: I realize it may not be the wisest course of action but the two quotes above seem to contradict each other. You are apparently misreading. The first quote suggests unanimous consent in cases that are routine or of little importance. The second suggests that if, in contrast, the matter is important, then a vote should be taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted February 4, 2018 at 12:33 PM Report Share Posted February 4, 2018 at 12:33 PM 12 hours ago, Benjamin Geiger said: So I guess the question is: what can't unanimous consent be used for? The only things that leap to mind are situations where the bylaws mandate a specific form of vote (ballot or roll call)... Next time please spend about two more seconds thinking before posting and I'm sure that other ways in which the use of unanimous consent can be precluded by some rule other than a rule in the bylaws will also leap to mind, as well as instances in which unanimous consent, even if sought and obtained, will not suffice for adoption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Fischer Posted February 5, 2018 at 12:41 AM Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 at 12:41 AM Thank you to all who have replied. Your responses have been helpful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setemu Posted February 5, 2018 at 03:45 PM Report Share Posted February 5, 2018 at 03:45 PM (edited) Perhaps this it too late and I hope the answer is not superfluous, but it seems to me that the it is the chair's propagative to judge, as JJ indicated, what is or is not of great little importance in determining whether to use unanimous consent. The chair might or not have the same judgement of the assembly in any given case, and there is no way for the chair to always know for sure whether those two judgements are in agreement. The evidence of whether they are in agreement is only given when the assembly either raises an objection or does not (unless, of course, there are written rules to the contrary). Edited February 5, 2018 at 03:55 PM by Setemu clarity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts