Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Naming and Potentially Expelling a Member for Actions as Opposed to Words


Gregory Carlson

Recommended Posts

RONR 61:9-17 discusses the process for naming a member and imposing a penalty for an infraction during a meeting.

I notice that the examples of disorder that are listed focus exclusively on inappropriate words used by a member in debate.

I would assume that the rules would also apply to illegal actions taking by a member?

For example, imagine a society which uses voting cards and unwisely uses the same voting cards from meeting to meeting.  The society allows proxies, so some members may have multiple cards.  It is discovered that a member is holding up more voting cards than the member is allowed to carry (perhaps the member kept some from the past meeting).

Surely this infraction could warrant being named and potentially expelled under the rules in 61:9-17?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2023 at 3:10 PM, Gregory Carlson said:

RONR 61:9-17 discusses the process for naming a member and imposing a penalty for an infraction during a meeting.

I notice that the examples of disorder that are listed focus exclusively on inappropriate words used by a member in debate.

I would assume that the rules would also apply to illegal actions taking by a member?

For example, imagine a society which uses voting cards and unwisely uses the same voting cards from meeting to meeting.  The society allows proxies, so some members may have multiple cards.  It is discovered that a member is holding up more voting cards than the member is allowed to carry (perhaps the member kept some from the past meeting).

Surely this infraction could warrant being named and potentially expelled under the rules in 61:9-17?

Yes it certainly could. And don't call me Shirley. 😊

(I would suggest however, that the word unwisely should be moved from before the word uses, and placed before the word allows.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2023 at 3:10 PM, Gregory Carlson said:

RONR 61:9-17 discusses the process for naming a member and imposing a penalty for an infraction during a meeting.

I notice that the examples of disorder that are listed focus exclusively on inappropriate words used by a member in debate.

I would assume that the rules would also apply to illegal actions taking by a member?

For example, imagine a society which uses voting cards and unwisely uses the same voting cards from meeting to meeting.  The society allows proxies, so some members may have multiple cards.  It is discovered that a member is holding up more voting cards than the member is allowed to carry (perhaps the member kept some from the past meeting).

Surely this infraction could warrant being named and potentially expelled under the rules in 61:9-17?

Stuffing a ballot box during a meeting would be a ground for disciplinary action using 61:11-61:12.  So would something like disrobing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2023 at 2:10 PM, Gregory Carlson said:

RONR 61:9-17 discusses the process for naming a member and imposing a penalty for an infraction during a meeting.

I notice that the examples of disorder that are listed focus exclusively on inappropriate words used by a member in debate.

I would assume that the rules would also apply to illegal actions taking by a member?

For example, imagine a society which uses voting cards and unwisely uses the same voting cards from meeting to meeting.  The society allows proxies, so some members may have multiple cards.  It is discovered that a member is holding up more voting cards than the member is allowed to carry (perhaps the member kept some from the past meeting).

Surely this infraction could warrant being named and potentially expelled under the rules in 61:9-17?

Yes, the procedures on 61:9-17 could also be applicable to actions taken by a member during the meeting and are not limited to words used by a member in debate.

Edited by Josh Martin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/9/2023 at 9:26 PM, Rob Elsman said:

Were I in the chair and a member shot me "the finger" in response to an adverse ruling, I would have no hesitation to "name" him.

 

Quote

 

24:2
Members have no right to criticize a ruling of the chair unless they appeal from his decision.

 

That would seem to rule out bird flipping, but it could also be argued that it leaves a loophole, making it permissible if accompanied by an appeal?

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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...