Leo Posted July 29, 2019 at 04:34 AM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 04:34 AM Point of order In cases where the chair, being in doubt, refers the point of order to the judgment of the assembly, the required vote is not prescribed by standard descriptive characteristic 7. 7 Is normally ruled upon by the chair. No vote is taken unless the chair is in doubt or his ruling is appealed. Where is the required vote given for determining if the point is well taken or not well taken when referred to the judgment of the assembly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Brown Posted July 29, 2019 at 05:15 AM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 05:15 AM 33 minutes ago, Leo said: Point of order In cases where the chair, being in doubt, refers the point of order to the judgment of the assembly, the required vote is not prescribed by standard descriptive characteristic 7. 7 Is normally ruled upon by the chair. No vote is taken unless the chair is in doubt or his ruling is appealed. Where is the required vote given for determining if the point is well taken or not well taken when referred to the judgment of the assembly? Good question. I don't recall seeing it in the book. However, it seems to me that if the chair is in doubt and "punts" to the assembly, it would take a majority vote to rule that the point of order is well taken. I think that on a tie vote, the point of order would not be well taken. It seems the burden should be on those raising a point of order to convince a majority that the point of order is indeed well taken. A motion, for example, should not be ruled out of order unless found to be out of order by a majority vote. Others may disagree. We shall soon know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atul Kapur Posted July 29, 2019 at 07:14 AM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 07:14 AM Table II gives the answer (Tinted Page 20). Motion 59. "is ruled upon by chair (unless he submits question to judgment of majority in assembly)" Also, the form and example on pages 254-255 describe a voice vote, which is used for votes requiring a majority. 1 hour ago, Richard Brown said: It seems the burden should be on those raising a point of order to convince a majority that the point of order is indeed well taken. A motion, for example, should not be ruled out of order unless found to be out of order by a majority vote. Page 255, lines 6-22. A portion of that citation states, "When a point of order is submitted to a vote of the assembly and the point relates to stopping something from being done, it is usually best to put the question so that an affirmative vote will be in favor of allowing the proceedings to continue as if the point had not been raised. Thus, if a point is made that the chair is admitting a motion which is out of order, the question should be put so that an affirmative result of the vote will mean that the motion is in order ..." [see the full citation to get the full answer, but this portion suffices to support Mr. Brown's statement] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 29, 2019 at 12:00 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 12:00 PM Well, I'm afraid that what is said on page 255 does not appear to support Mr. Brown's statement that "[a] motion, for example, should not be ruled out of order unless found to be out of order by a majority vote." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Posted July 29, 2019 at 12:08 PM Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 12:08 PM Page 105, lines 8–12 “It is preferable to avoid a motion containing a negative statement even in cases where the effect ofthe motion is to propose that something be done, since members may become confused as to the effectof voting for or against such a motion.” A similar statement is made on page 105, lines 8–12, and both statements address the issue of putting the question so the affirmative vote will favor allowing the proceedings or allowing that something be done. Neither statement gives the required vote that is typically given in the 7thStandard Descriptive Characteristic. I believe that an affirmative vote of a majority is required to allowing the proceedings to continue as if the point had not been raised. But, in this case the 7thcharacteristic, unlike others, does not give the vote required, and I can find no other citations that actually give the affirmative vote required to allow the proceedings to continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 29, 2019 at 12:48 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 12:48 PM If there is no applicable rule somewhere requiring something other than a majority vote, then a majority vote is the vote required for approval (RONR, 11th ed., p. 400, ll. 5-7). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:38 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:38 PM I opine that Standard Descriptive Characteristic 7 of the motion to Appeal from the decision of the chair is sufficient to support Mr. Brown's position. See RONR (11th Ed.), p. 258. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:48 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:48 PM 10 minutes ago, reelsman said: I opine that Standard Descriptive Characteristic 7 of the motion to Appeal from the decision of the chair is sufficient to support Mr. Brown's position. See RONR (11th Ed.), p. 258. Sustains his position as to what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Katz Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:52 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:52 PM 8 hours ago, Atul Kapur said: Page 255, lines 6-22. A portion of that citation states, "When a point of order is submitted to a vote of the assembly and the point relates to stopping something from being done, it is usually best to put the question so that an affirmative vote will be in favor of allowing the proceedings to continue as if the point had not been raised. Thus, if a point is made that the chair is admitting a motion which is out of order, the question should be put so that an affirmative result of the vote will mean that the motion is in order ..." [see the full citation to get the full answer, but this portion suffices to support Mr. Brown's statement] I don't see how. If an affirmative vote means the motion is in order, then a negative vote (including a tie) means the point of order is well-taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:52 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 03:52 PM 2 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: Sustains his position as to what? "However, it seems to me that if the chair is in doubt and "punts" to the assembly, it would take a majority vote to rule that the point of order is well taken." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted July 29, 2019 at 04:03 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 04:03 PM But as has been noted, what is said on page 255 does not support Mr. Brown's statement that "[a] motion, for example, should not be ruled out of order unless found to be out of order by a majority vote." Just the opposite is true if the question is put to the assembly in the form in which RONR says it should be put on page 255, lines 10-15. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted July 29, 2019 at 04:19 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 04:19 PM I think what has developed is a question that neither Mr. Brown nor I intended to answer. I also doubt that the original poster was asking about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Posted July 29, 2019 at 06:08 PM Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 06:08 PM The original poster, Leo, that's me, was asking for a citation to support a required majority vote to allow proceedings to continue when the point is referred to the assembly because the chair is in doubt.. Daniel Honemann gave the citation on page 400, lines 5–7. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted July 29, 2019 at 06:20 PM Report Share Posted July 29, 2019 at 06:20 PM (edited) A majority vote is clearly the correct answer. Page 255 will give guidance on the way the question should be put. Edited July 29, 2019 at 06:25 PM by reelsman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted August 1, 2019 at 12:22 PM Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 at 12:22 PM Mr. Gerber: Let me suggest to you that the second sentence of Standard Characteristic 7 for a Point of Order, RONR, (11th ed.), p. 249, be rewritten to clarify that a majority vote is required when the chair is in doubt and puts the question to the assembly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted August 1, 2019 at 12:42 PM Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 at 12:42 PM 17 minutes ago, reelsman said: Mr. Gerber: Let me suggest to you that the second sentence of Standard Characteristic 7 for a Point of Order, RONR, (11th ed.), p. 249, be rewritten to clarify that a majority vote is required when the chair is in doubt and puts the question to the assembly. So what am I, a potted plant? 🙂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. J. Posted August 1, 2019 at 12:54 PM Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 at 12:54 PM (edited) 17 minutes ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: So what am I, a potted plant? 🙂 Maybe he just got confused, Burke. Edited August 1, 2019 at 01:00 PM by J. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Elsman Posted August 1, 2019 at 03:15 PM Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 at 03:15 PM You're supposed to be out on the bay fishing. 😜 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted August 1, 2019 at 06:16 PM Report Share Posted August 1, 2019 at 06:16 PM 5 hours ago, Daniel H. Honemann said: So what am I, a potted plant? 🙂 Yeah! What is he, a pot plant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts