Guest Ispeakwhaletoo Posted January 30, 2020 at 08:32 PM Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 at 08:32 PM If an organization wants to change a word that can be found multiple times throughout a Constitution and Bylaws document, is it possible to do one blanket vote for the word to be changed or does each section need to be voted on and approved? For instance, if we change the word full to exhaustive - can we do a constitution and bylaw amendment proposing the change, have it voted on, and include that each time the word "full" is found it will be changed to "exhaustive" throughout the entire document? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Lages Posted January 30, 2020 at 08:44 PM Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 at 08:44 PM Yes, that is possible. In fact it is probably more appropriate to state the amendment in that way - "strike out the word 'full' in each instance where it appears and insert the word 'exhaustive'" -- than to try to list each occurrence of the word 'full' separately because there is more of a chance that one or more occurrences might be missed using the latter method. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Follow up Posted January 30, 2020 at 08:46 PM Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 at 08:46 PM Could this be a part of the "Settled Rule" (REF: Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised in Brief, 2011) pg. 50? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted January 30, 2020 at 09:21 PM Report Share Posted January 30, 2020 at 09:21 PM 34 minutes ago, Guest Follow up said: Could this be a part of the "Settled Rule" (REF: Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised in Brief, 2011) pg. 50? No, this has nothing to do with the rule against making a subsidiary motion to Amend that raises the same question as one decided earlier at the same session. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 31, 2020 at 12:14 AM Report Share Posted January 31, 2020 at 12:14 AM 3 hours ago, Bruce Lages said: Yes, that is possible. In fact it is probably more appropriate to state the amendment in that way - "strike out the word 'full' in each instance where it appears and insert the word 'exhaustive'" -- than to try to list each occurrence of the word 'full' separately because there is more of a chance that one or more occurrences might be missed using the latter method. Agreed. But it's also necessary to make very sure that the word does not appear in some other context, somewhere in the document that would be inappropriate to change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Danny Posted January 31, 2020 at 08:36 PM Report Share Posted January 31, 2020 at 08:36 PM test reply Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 31, 2020 at 08:40 PM Report Share Posted January 31, 2020 at 08:40 PM 2 minutes ago, Guest Danny said: test reply test reply passed reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts