Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Uses of Committee of the Whole


Setemu
 Share

Recommended Posts

My understanding of committee of the whole is that it should generally be treated as any other committee, specifically in regards to it needing a question referred to it and that it report back to the assembly on that question. I also understand that committees generally may be instructed to investigate or research a specific topic for the (sole?) purpose of providing a recommendation. My questions are this:

1) Does the question referred to CoW need to be pending in the assembly, or am I correct that a single motion can propose both the motion and that it be referred to CoW?

2) Can a general subject be referred to CoW for discussion without any pending motion, for example, "I move to refer the subject of our training practices (otherwise not specified) to a committee of the whole" in order to initiate general discussion on the topic? (While I understand that CoW is a device primarily meant to remove limits of debate, I have some members that want to use it as a means of allowing discussion on a specific subject yet without a pending motion).

3) Can a standing or special committee recommend in their report, and reporting member move, that question referred to them now be referred to CoW?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Sure. Propose to "...Suspend The Rules and take up the motion to (the text of the motion) and refer it to the Committee Of the Whole." The vote to Suspend The Rules needs to be two thirds.

2. I know of no method to start a Committee Of the Whole without an actual motion. After all, the Committee Of the Whole's purpose is to recommend amendments to the main motion and if no main motion exists then there is nothing to amend. Perhaps you should move that a special committee be formed to study the subject and that its members include the entire assembly. The special committee can then suggest a motion or not as it sees fit.

3. Yes. However, the assembly is not required to take their advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Guest Zev. That clears it up for me. I will look into the idea of a special committee as a possible option, although I think in my particular situation the best course in most cases will be to find some other way (Good of the Order?) for that discussion to take place and then, if a desired motion comes out of the discussion, it can be made at the next meeting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Guest Zev said:

2. I know of no method to start a Committee Of the Whole without an actual motion. After all, the Committee Of the Whole's purpose is to recommend amendments to the main motion and if no main motion exists then there is nothing to amend.

I disagree. A subject can be referred to the Committee of the Whole (CotW) as it could be referred to any committee; there is no limitation that only main motions can be referred and I can't find any mention that the CotW's purpose is limited to recommending amendments to the main motion. Page 531, lines 22-24 talk about "referring a subject" to CotW, not limiting it to a specific motion.

Page 532, lines 4-7 give the form of the motion (certain options omitted) as follows: "MEMBER (obtaining the floor): I move to go into a committee of the whole to take under consideration ...(stating the subject)." in this case, training practices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Good Of The Order" is I think the perfect place. There is space to discuss things among the entire group and elaborate a motion to that effect.

I never have actually ever thought of the possibility of the assembly referring just a subject without a motion attached to a Committee of the Whole. I suppose there is no reason why a Committee of the Whole cannot recommend or not any particular course of action and the assembly can do whatever it wants with that report whether there was a main motion or not, or whether the report suggests the assembly adopt a main motion or not.  Because the motion to go into the Committee of the Whole is a form of the motion to Refer, and is a subsidiary motion to the main motion, I just never considered the possibility of there not existing a main motion to go along with it. I will accept your reasoning under advisement and invite others to wax on whether they see any problems with convening the Committee of the Whole without a formal main motion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I should clarify my statement "without a formal main motion."  It should be clear that there is a motion to go into either a Committee of the Whole (or one of the other two forms) but that there is no formal main motion referred to the committee but only a subject is being referred.

In the mean time, I have reviewed the section on the three forms of this motion and so far I can detect no reason why a subject-only cannot be referred to these committees as suggested by Mr. Kapur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Guest Zev said:

The "Good Of The Order" is I think the perfect place. There is space to discuss things among the entire group and elaborate a motion to that effect.

As I understand it, GOTO cannot result in a motion, at least not for the current meeting.

 

58 minutes ago, Guest Zev said:

Because the motion to go into the Committee of the Whole is a form of the motion to Refer, and is a subsidiary motion to the main motion, I just never considered the possibility of there not existing a main motion to go along with it.

The motion to Commit or Refer can also be a main motion, which it would be in the situation described here. (p. 168, lines 29-35).

1 hour ago, Guest Zev said:

I never have actually ever thought of the possibility of the assembly referring just a subject without a motion attached to a Committee of the Whole. . . .
I will accept your reasoning under advisement and invite others to wax on whether they see any problems with convening the Committee of the Whole without a formal main motion.

I'll start the waxing process :-) 

One example where I've seen it work very well is a national medical association where they wanted to have free discussion to explore multiple facets of a subject. It worked very well for them and they have continued to use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Atul Kapur, PRP "Student" said:

As I understand it, GOTO cannot result in a motion, at least not for the current meeting.

If the meeting has not adjourned then I suppose the assembly can still move and consider any main motion it desires. Am I wrong about this?

2 hours ago, Atul Kapur, PRP "Student" said:

The motion to Commit or Refer can also be a main motion, which it would be in the situation described here. (p. 168, lines 29-35).

Yes, for some reason I had forgotten about that. Thank you for reminding me.

2 hours ago, Atul Kapur, PRP "Student" said:

I'll start the waxing process :-)

You go, dude! B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 hours ago, Atul Kapur, PRP "Student" said:

One example where I've seen it work very well is a national medical association where they wanted to have free discussion to explore multiple facets of a subject. It worked very well for them and they have continued to use it.

"Committee of the whole is under the rules of the assembly" except that the only motions adopt (in the report), amend (items in the report), rise and report, and a few incidental motions. (p. 533) are allowed, and it "enables the full assembly to give detailed consideration to a matter under freedom approximating those of a committee" (p. 529, III, 34-35, emphasis added), by removing only the limit of debate of number of times (p. 529-530, III. 35 - I. 5). 

I guess the question on which much of this pivots is whether or not the characteristic activity of a committee that "informal discussion of a subject is permitted while no motion is pending" (p. 488) is also allowed in Committee of the Whole, and given what I cited above, and that there are other characteristics of a committee that I understand to be not allowed in CoW, e.g., motions not needing to be seconded (ibid.), I am yet to be convinced that the characteristic activity of informal discussion while no motion is pending is allowed in CoW.

Edited by Setemu
added citation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Guest Zev said:

If the meeting has not adjourned then I suppose the assembly can still move and consider any main motion it desires. Am I wrong about this?

So long as there is quorum, I don't think RONR prohibits this, especially given "the practice of some organizations would place motions or resolutions relating to formal disciplinary procedures...at this point [GOTO]" (p. 362, II. 14-19). 

Edited by Setemu
adding lines to citation
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Setemu said:

My understanding of committee of the whole is that it should generally be treated as any other committee, specifically in regards to it needing a question referred to it and that it report back to the assembly on that question. I also understand that committees generally may be instructed to investigate or research a specific topic for the (sole?) purpose of providing a recommendation. My questions are this:

1) Does the question referred to CoW need to be pending in the assembly, or am I correct that a single motion can propose both the motion and that it be referred to CoW?

2) Can a general subject be referred to CoW for discussion without any pending motion, for example, "I move to refer the subject of our training practices (otherwise not specified) to a committee of the whole" in order to initiate general discussion on the topic? (While I understand that CoW is a device primarily meant to remove limits of debate, I have some members that want to use it as a means of allowing discussion on a specific subject yet without a pending motion).

3) Can a standing or special committee recommend in their report, and reporting member move, that question referred to them now be referred to CoW?

1.) Yes.

2.) Yes.

3.) Yes.

12 hours ago, Guest Zev said:

1. Sure. Propose to "...Suspend The Rules and take up the motion to (the text of the motion) and refer it to the Committee Of the Whole." The vote to Suspend The Rules needs to be two thirds.

2. I know of no method to start a Committee Of the Whole without an actual motion. After all, the Committee Of the Whole's purpose is to recommend amendments to the main motion and if no main motion exists then there is nothing to amend. Perhaps you should move that a special committee be formed to study the subject and that its members include the entire assembly. The special committee can then suggest a motion or not as it sees fit.

1. I do not think it is necessary to suspend the rules. The motion to Commit may be adopted as an incidental main motion when no motion is pending.

2. I disagree. Committee of the Whole is a true committee in every sense of the word. If a special committee may be appointed to study a subject (which it most certainly can), then the same may be done for Committee of the Whole.

9 hours ago, Atul Kapur, PRP "Student" said:

As I understand it, GOTO cannot result in a motion, at least not for the current meeting.

This depends on the assembly’s Rules, but generally, it is correct that motions are not in order during Good of the Order (except, in some assemblies, motions relating to discipline). It seems to me, however, that the assembly could suspend the rules for this purpose.

7 hours ago, Guest Zev said:

If the meeting has not adjourned then I suppose the assembly can still move and consider any main motion it desires. Am I wrong about this?

Motions are only in order at the appropriate time in the order of business. Most assemblies do not permit motions during Good of the Order - although we do not know for certain what is the rule in the OP’s society.

19 minutes ago, Setemu said:

I guess the question on which much of this pivots is whether or not the characteristic activity of a committee that "informal discussion of a subject is permitted while no motion is pending" (p. 488) is also allowed in Committee of the Whole, and given what I cited above, and that there are other characteristics of a committee that I understand to be not allowed in CoW, e.g., motions not needing to be seconded (ibid.), I am yet to be convinced that the characteristic activity of informal discussion while no motion is pending is allowed in CoW.

I think it is perfectly appropriate for a Committee of the Whole to discuss the subject it has been appointed to discuss.

I think it is correct to say that Committee of the Whole is more limited in this respect than other committees. A Committee of the Whole cannot just start talking about whatever it wants.

9 minutes ago, Setemu said:

So long as there is quorum, I don't think RONR prohibits this, especially given "the practice of some organizations would place motions or resolutions relating to formal disciplinary procedures...at this point [GOTO]" (p. 362). 

Yes, but does not that text also suggest to you that those organizations do not permit motions during Good of the Order except motions relating to formal disciplinary procedures?

If your organization permits motions to be made during Good of the Order, however, so be it.

I’d also note that Good of the Order is generally supposed to be limited to members making brief observations and announcements and is not intended to turn into full-scale discussion, but again, your organization may do it differently.

With all that technical stuff out of the way - what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Even if it turns out Committee of the Whole is not the appropriate tool, I’m sure we can come up with something else.

Edited by Josh Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Atul Kapur, PRP "Student" said:

One example where I've seen it work very well is a national medical association where they wanted to have free discussion to explore multiple facets of a subject. It worked very well for them and they have continued to use it.

An article describing this process was published in National Parliamentarian, Summer 2017, "The Whole Consideration,"  pp. 19-22.  It is on line here:  https://issuu.com/parliamentarians/docs/nap_np_78-4-www

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

1. I do not think it is necessary to suspend the rules. The motion to Commit may be adopted as an incidental main motion when no motion is pending.

 

In some cases, the motion to Commit is an original main motion (p. 168, ll. 32-5).  In some of the cases described, it would be an original main motion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, J. J. said:

In some cases, the motion to Commit is an original main motion (p. 168, ll. 32-5).  In some of the cases described, it would be an original main motion. 

Good catch. Yes, the motion to Commit may be made as a main motion when no motion is pending, and depending on the circumstances, it may be an original main motion or an incidental main motion.

Edited by Josh Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, J. J. said:

An article describing this process was published in National Parliamentarian, Summer 2017, "The Whole Consideration,"  pp. 19-22.  It is on line here:  https://issuu.com/parliamentarians/docs/nap_np_78-4-www

I do recall reading that now that you point it out, and I think that is where I am getting my reading of RONR. Specifically in that article, the example of how the CoW can discuss the issue without a pending main motion is of the form that "to investigate the possibility of creating a scholarship...", in other words, in the form provided in that article, the Committee of the Whole must be directed at some potential activity of the assembly as a whole, not just a general discussion about a topic.

 

2 hours ago, Josh Martin said:

With all that technical stuff out of the way - what exactly are you trying to accomplish? Even if it turns out Committee of the Whole is not the appropriate tool, I’m sure we can come up with something else.

Case 1: a standing committee with standing powers to create and effect policies of type A creates such a policy. Said policy is reported to the assembly. An assembly member wants to discuss the policy, likely because she is unhappy with it, wish to express said dissatisfaction, and wants to see if others in the assembly are also dissatisfied with it.

Case 2: a standing committee with standing powers to make policy recommendations of type B to the assembly reports to the assembly on the progress of a draft of such a policy (it is unknown whether this question originated in committee or was referred to it). The reporting member wishes to have a format like a hearing, wherein feedback is sought but not in the formal way of a CoW report, as the  committee does not want to risk the assembly, at that stage in the drafting, to take ownership of the draft.

edited to add: in both of these cases, there is a report. As I understand it, questions of fact are allowed after the delivery of a report, but comments generally are not allowed unless they are going to lead to a motion. In both of the above cases, members wish to open up a forum for comments on the reports without reference to any pending motion or to a consideration of potential action of the assembly.

Edited by Setemu
addition of detail to provide greater clarity on central question
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Setemu said:

Case 1: a standing committee with standing powers to create and effect policies of type A creates such a policy. Said policy is reported to the assembly. An assembly member wants to discuss the policy, likely because she is unhappy with it, wish to express said dissatisfaction, and wants to see if others in the assembly are also dissatisfied with it.

Case 2: a standing committee with standing powers to make policy recommendations of type B to the assembly reports to the assembly on the progress of a draft of such a policy (it is unknown whether this question originated in committee or was referred to it). The reporting member wishes to have a format like a hearing, wherein feedback is sought but not in the formal way of a CoW report, as the  committee does not want to risk the assembly, at that stage in the drafting, to take ownership of the draft.

edited to add: in both of these cases, there is a report. As I understand it, questions of fact are allowed after the delivery of a report, but comments generally are not allowed unless they are going to lead to a motion. In both of the above cases, members wish to open up a forum for comments on the reports without reference to any pending motion or to a consideration of potential action of the assembly.

Thank you. These facts are extremely helpful. Based on this information, I think I would recommend the following:

Case 1.) I think Committee of the Whole actually is a very appropriate tool for this case. The member could move “That the assembly enter into a Committee of the Whole, for the purpose of discussing the policy pertaining to (whatever) adopted by the committee.”

Case 2.) The best method in this case would to simply have a committee hearing on the topic. If the committee member wishes to do this during the assembly’s meeting, he could move “That the assembly recess for the purpose of holding a hearing on the committee’s recommendation pertaining to (whatever).” The member may insert such other specifications as he desires for the hearing in the motion.

You understand correctly that questions of fact are permitted after a report, but comments are generally not allowed unless they are going to lead to a motion.

It is also in order, in my view, simply to move for an “open discussion” on a particular topic, if that is what the assembly wants to do. “For a member to begin to discuss a matter while no question is pending, without promptly leading to a motion, implies an unusual circumstance and requires permission of the assembly (see p. 299) in addition to obtaining the floor.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 34) The rules which require a motion to be pending for discussion are to prevent a small number of members from wasting the assembly’s time by talking about random nonsense. If the assembly feels that, in a particular case, it serves the assembly’s needs better to permit more open discussion, it is free to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

Thank you. These facts are extremely helpful. Based on this information, I think I would recommend the following:

Case 1.) I think Committee of the Whole actually is a very appropriate tool for this case. The member could move “That the assembly enter into a Committee of the Whole, for the purpose of discussing the policy pertaining to (whatever) adopted by the committee.”

Thank you for your time. While on the one hand I understand the rules may permit not prohibit this use, on the other hand do the rules necessary conflict with a chair's ruling that "a motion to move into committee of the whole without a referred question or specific instructions is out of order"?

Am I correct that the committee nonetheless has to provide a report, even though there was no specific direction given to the discussion?

Am I also correct that, even without specific instructions or referred question, the committee may adopt recommendations, for example, to instruct the committee further regarding this policy?

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

Case 2.) The best method in this case would to simply have a committee hearing on the topic. If the committee member wishes to do this during the assembly’s meeting, he could move “That the assembly recess for the purpose of holding a hearing on the committee’s recommendation pertaining to (whatever).” The member may insert such other specifications as he desires for the hearing in the motion.

Am I correct that a quorum of members is not required for the hearing but a quorum of the committee is?

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

It is also in order, in my view, simply to move for an “open discussion” on a particular topic, if that is what the assembly wants to do. “For a member to begin to discuss a matter while no question is pending, without promptly leading to a motion, implies an unusual circumstance and requires permission of the assembly (see p. 299) in addition to obtaining the floor.” (RONR, 11th ed., pg. 34) The rules which require a motion to be pending for discussion are to prevent a small number of members from wasting the assembly’s time by talking about random nonsense. If the assembly feels that, in a particular case, it serves the assembly’s needs better to permit more open discussion, it is free to do so.

I appreciate you offering this suggestion. I am reluctant to use the passage on p. 299 to justify an open discussion, though, because as it appears to me there, from the examples provided in that passage, that the permission requested is for a member to address remarks or give a presentation--or, more broadly, that there is a single member wishing to address the assembly at some length, without a pending motion or leading to a motion, but not to open up an unstructured discussion, possibly including scores of members rising an indefinite number of times to speak the same. It also appears that this is for extenuating circumstances and not intended to be relied upon regularly. If an open discussion more unstructured than Committee of the Whole were to be sought, it would seem more like a motion to insert Good of the Order in the middle of reports, which would require 2/3 to suspend rules interfering with moving Good of the Oder to the next item of business (following the report in question and skipping over, temporarily, general orders and new business).

Edited by Setemu
strike and insert
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Setemu said:

Thank you for your time. While on the one hand I understand the rules may permit not prohibit this use, on the other hand do the rules necessary conflict with a chair's ruling that "a motion to move into committee of the whole without a referred question or specific instructions is out of order"?

I do not think such a ruling would be correct.

2 hours ago, Setemu said:

Am I correct that the committee nonetheless has to provide a report, even though there was no specific direction given to the discussion

No. The committee is never required to adopt a report. The committee is free to simply adopt a motion to rise.

“If the committee wishes to bring its proceedings to an end because it believes the matter can be better handled under the assembly's rules, or because it wishes the meeting to be adjourned, the motion to rise can be made in this form: 

MEMBER (obtaining the floor): I move that the committee rise. (Second.) 

If this motion is adopted, the committee chairman then reports: 

COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: The committee of the whole has had under consideration . . . [describing the matter] and has come to no conclusion thereon.” (RONR, 11th ed., pgs. 536-537)

2 hours ago, Setemu said:

Am I also correct that, even without specific instructions or referred question, the committee may adopt recommendations, for example, to instruct the committee further regarding this policy?

Yes.

2 hours ago, Setemu said:

Am I correct that a quorum of members is not required for the hearing but a quorum of the committee is?

Yes.

2 hours ago, Setemu said:

I am reluctant to use the passage on p. 299 to justify an open discussion, though, because as it appears to me there, from the examples provided in that passage, that the permission requested is for a member to address remarks or give a presentation--or, more broadly, that there is a single member wishing to address the assembly at some length, without a pending motion or leading to a motion, but not to open up an unstructured discussion, possibly including scores of members rising an indefinite number of times to speak the same.

I do not think the language on pg. 299 is intended to exclude an unstructured discussion. I think it is simply expected that doing so would be less common than it would be to permit a single member to make brief remarks. I understand the concerns about the lack of limits, and the assembly is of course free to to place whatever limits in the motion it wishes, and is also free to adopt a motion ending the discussion at any time.

2 hours ago, Setemu said:

It also appears that this is for extenuating circumstances and not intended to be relied upon regularly.

It was my understanding that these were extenuating circumstances. Are you saying that the assembly regularly desires to have the entire assembly discus a subject with no motion pending? How large is this assembly?

2 hours ago, Setemu said:

If an open discussion more unstructured than Committee of the Whole were to be sought, it would seem more like a motion to insert Good of the Order in the middle of reports, which would require 2/3 to suspend rules interfering with moving Good of the Oder to the next item of business (following the report in question and skipping over, temporarily, general orders and new business).

Good of the Order is generally a period where members make brief remarks and is not intended to be a full-fledged discussion, although it seems your assembly may use Good of the Order differently.

In any event, another tool, if you really want an unstructured discussion, would be to move to Recess. This would only require a majority vote.

Edited by Josh Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Josh Martin said:

It was my understanding that these were extenuating circumstances. Are you saying that the assembly regularly desires to have the entire assembly discus a subject with no motion pending? How large is this assembly?

The assembly wishes to discuss a subject with no motion pending at least once in each of approximately 25-33% of the meetings, and the assembly is >100 members.

1 hour ago, Josh Martin said:

“If the committee wishes to bring its proceedings to an end because it believes the matter can be better handled under the assembly's rules, or because it wishes the meeting to be adjourned, the motion to rise can be made in this form.

Perhaps this is a matter of interpretive disagreement, or its a theoretical debate and this isn't the place for it, or maybe it's merely my novice reading of RONR and maybe there is not much more to say on this topic except that, but my question with this passage would be, what matter is being handled in this example? That is, is a general discussion of a subject a matter to be "handled"? The point here is only to say (a) that examples and discussion in the section of RONR regarding committees generally and Committee of the Whole seem to assume that something specific beyond merely "discussion of [subject x]" was referred to or instructed of the Committee of the Whole, and (b) that if there is this other use of the committee of the whole for an assembly--to formally discuss a subject generally and without any specific instructions--that this is a powerful use of the device that deserves at least some attention in the new edition, as it is not readily apparent in the language of the 11th edition.

To wit (and, if anything, perhaps this just communicates how a novice might (mis)read the text): when describing the task of committees generally, the 11th ed. says it is "to consider, investigate, or take action on certain matters..."(p. 489, II. 22-24), and I've had have a hard time understanding what it would mean for a committee to consider a subject without specifying what, exactly, a committee is supposed to consider about that subject; although, I think I might be a little clearer on that now. Regarding Committee of the Whole, the description is as follows: "In large assemblies, the use of the committee of the whole is a convenient method of considering a question [without limit of number of times of debate]" (p. 489-90). Elsewhere it reads, "The parliamentary steps in making use of committee of the whole are essentially the same as those involved in referring a subject to an ordinary committee. The assembly goes into committee of the whole (which is equivalent to voting to refer the matter to the committee)...the committee considers the referred matter, adopts a report to be made to the assembly, then votes to 'rise and report'. Finally, the committee chairman presents the report and the assembly considers the committees recommendations--all as in the case of an ordinary committee" (p. 531, IV. 22-3). These descriptions do not appear to me to be inclusive of other uses of committee of the whole as you and others have suggested, except with the exception that later in the section on Committee of the Whole, a motion simply to rise (as opposed to "rise and report") is offered as an allowable motion (p. 533, II. 7).

Nonetheless, what seems to be the case is that the use of the committee of the whole in the way you describe is not explicitly precluded by the rules. I very much appreciate you and others taking the time to describe how Committee of the Whole has this other use, and I can now advise with this option in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Setemu said:

The assembly wishes to discuss a subject with no motion pending at least once in each of approximately 25-33% of the meetings, and the assembly is >100 members.

In this event, Committee of the Whole probably is the best tool available in RONR, and if it does not quite fit the assembly’s needs, the assembly may need to adopt special rules of order to accommodate such desires. RONR does not really anticipate that an assembly of that size would want to regularly discuss a subject with no motion pending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay got it - thanks.  I was getting it mixed up with the option on page 299.

Though re-reviewing page 299 had an interesting phrase that was part of a dispute I had a few months ago in which I stated that one of the goals of parliamentary proceedings was equity and justice - and that phrase appears on 299 in a form "as is consistent with the demand of justice."

I think I am going to pop in my CD and see where else "justice" occurs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...