Do you minute a motion that did not receive a "second"?

[Guest Jim]

When I've asked for the minuting of a failed motion, and used http://www.rulesonline.com/rror-10.htm#60 as a source, the response I get back is:

"The Robert’s Rules Association has issued a non-binding opinion that a motion failing for a lack of a seconded SHOULD be recorded. NON-BINDING. Robert’s Rules themselves do not state such a requirement. We operate under Robert’s Rules not under the recommendations of the Association."

Any thoughts?

[Daniel H. Honemann]

17 minutes ago, Guest Jim said:

When I've asked for the minuting of a failed motion, and used http://www.rulesonline.com/rror-10.htm#60 as a source, the response I get back is:

"The Robert’s Rules Association has issued a non-binding opinion that a motion failing for a lack of a seconded SHOULD be recorded. NON-BINDING. Robert’s Rules themselves do not state such a requirement. We operate under Robert’s Rules not under the recommendations of the Association."

Any thoughts?

 First of all, the Robert’s Rules Association has nothing to do with the substance of the rules contained in RONR (other than employment of its authors), and issues no opinions concerning the rules.

 

[Weldon Merritt]

25 minutes ago, Guest Jim said:

Any thoughts?

Robertsrulesonline.com is not the official RONR website. I believe it is based on to 4th edition of Robert's Rules, which is the earliest edition that is no longer copyrighted. You need to be referring to the 12th edition of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised. And the official website is www.robertsrules.com. Take a look at Official Interpretation 2006-7. I don't think I can add anything of substance to what that opinion says.

 

[Gary Novosielski]

1 hour ago, Guest Jim said:

When I've asked for the minuting of a failed motion, and used http://www.rulesonline.com/rror-10.htm#60 as a source, the response I get back is:

"The Robert’s Rules Association has issued a non-binding opinion that a motion failing for a lack of a seconded SHOULD be recorded. NON-BINDING. Robert’s Rules themselves do not state such a requirement. We operate under Robert’s Rules not under the recommendations of the Association."

Any thoughts?

The motions that should be recorded according to RONR 12th ed.48:4(6) include:

Quote

[A]ll main motions (10) or motions to bring a main question again before the assembly (6:25–27; 34–37) that were made or taken up—except, normally, any that were notwithdrawn....

Since a motion that dies for lack of a second has been "made", it should be recorded.  That's out of the pages of RONR, not from the Association which does not issue opinions anyway.

I would not make too much of the auxiliary verb "should".  In the absence of a rule or custom in your organization, this indicates the way things should be done.  The word should is not an invitation to do things the way they shouldn't be done, just because the chair feels like it.  A point of order would, in my view, be well taken, and appealable if not, with 48:4 being persuasive.

 

[Bruce Lages]

Please note that the quote from RONR, 48:4(6) cited above should read  "...except, normally, any that were withdrawn..."  (A reverse 'not-hole'?)

[Gary Novosielski]

On 12/8/2020 at 10:24 PM, Bruce Lages said:

Please note that the quote from RONR, 48:4(6) cited above should read  "...except, normally, any that were withdrawn..."  (A reverse 'not-hole'?)

Yikes!  Don't know how that happened, but it's been fixed.  Thanks.