Guest George Mervosh Posted March 12, 2010 at 01:49 PM Report Share Posted March 12, 2010 at 01:49 PM 1) RONR, p. 339 and p. 629. 2) No. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Trina Posted March 12, 2010 at 02:04 PM Report Share Posted March 12, 2010 at 02:04 PM > An individual who can control the meeting if it wanders off topic or expands a topic that is not necessary? < This sounds like part of the job of the chair. The chair may receive advice from a parliamentarian (who could point out problems" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest H.Wm.Mountcastle Posted March 12, 2010 at 05:26 PM Report Share Posted March 12, 2010 at 05:26 PM Sargent at Arms? No. Sergeant-at-arms? Yes." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nancy N. Posted March 13, 2010 at 03:08 AM Report Share Posted March 13, 2010 at 03:08 AM And, pretty much definitively, p. 446." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thomas Ralph Posted March 15, 2010 at 10:19 AM Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 at 10:19 AM That is not the role of a sergeant-at-arms, and most ordinary societies won't require such a role." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stan Posted March 15, 2010 at 02:05 PM Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 at 02:05 PM Not unless it is written in the ByLaws, which I have seen." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Thomas Ralph Posted March 15, 2010 at 02:23 PM Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 at 02:23 PM If it's written in the bylaws, it means they *have* the role; I continue to maintain that most societies do not *need* the role." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.