Motions violating procedural rules in legislation not in order. What did it say prior?

[RSW]

15 hours ago, Guest Zev said:

Consequently, the local chapter of the Kiwanis and the local chapter of the "Secret Society of County Firebugs" may handle such motions in completely different ways. 

Even the Kiwanis could conceivably have an ostensible purpose in testing fire department response time, although the circumstances for doing so would be pretty esoteric. I believe that part of the reason we have RONR and parliamentary debate is so that we can have discussion about whether something is in line with a society's object. It feels premature for the chair to rule something out of order because they don't immediately see the connection.

If somebody just wanted to gripe about dues without having a proposal to change them (and presumably realized there needed to be a motion on the floor to do so), moving "to replace the text 'dues for each member shall be $100 per year' with 'dues for each member shall be $100 per year' in Chapter 3, subsection 2 of the bylaws", that would almost certainly be frivolous as it would be a motion to amend the text with a null effect.

"I move that the chair shut his stupid mouth for the rest of the meeting" would almost certainly be frivolous, as it's nonsensical prima facie. And even an appeal from the decision of the chair (after he rules it out of order) could logically be disallowed.

Edited April 12, 2021 at 05:51 PM by RSW

[Shmuel Gerber]

23 hours ago, Guest Zev said:

I was under the impression that the determination whether the motion had an objective basis or not was contingent on what the bylaws said was the society's object.

A society is allowed to take action outside of its defined object if permission to do so is granted by a two-thirds vote, but I don't see what that has to do with the present discussion. We were talking about the basis for the chair's ruling that a motion is dilatory or frivolous, and that the chair's determination on that question should be objective and not based on whether the chair believes the proposal is wise or foolish.