g.fredrick Posted September 13, 2010 at 03:50 PM Report Share Posted September 13, 2010 at 03:50 PM May a Nominating Committee nominate members of the nominating committee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted September 13, 2010 at 03:53 PM Report Share Posted September 13, 2010 at 03:53 PM May a Nominating Committee nominate members of the nominating committee?Yes, and RONR addresses this question specifically, if indirectly, on p. 419.Or maybe that should be indirectly, if not specifically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdave Posted September 14, 2010 at 04:24 PM Report Share Posted September 14, 2010 at 04:24 PM Yes, and RONR addresses this question specifically, if indirectly, on p. 419.Or maybe that should be indirectly, if not specifically."Members of the nominating committee are not barred from becoming nomninees for office themselves."Actually sounds specific and direct to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted September 14, 2010 at 04:56 PM Report Share Posted September 14, 2010 at 04:56 PM "Members of the nominating committee are not barred from becoming nomninees for office themselves."Actually sounds specific and direct to me...Yes, but it doesn't specifically say that the nominating committee can nominate its own members. So one might assume that members of the nominating committee could only be nominated from the floor. One could even read the word "becoming" as indicating a nomination to be made in the future, after the committee has delivered its report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Mervosh Posted September 14, 2010 at 04:59 PM Report Share Posted September 14, 2010 at 04:59 PM Yes, but it doesn't specifically say that the nominating committee can nominate its own members. So one might assume that members of the nominating committee could only be nominated from the floor. One could even read the word "becoming" as indicating a nomination to be made in the future, after the committee has delivered its report.Then they would be wrong, and I wouldn't place any bets on the wording being revised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted September 14, 2010 at 05:06 PM Report Share Posted September 14, 2010 at 05:06 PM Then they would be wrong, and I wouldn't place any bets on the wording being revised.Yes, but "they" have been wrong before.And anyone who bets on the wording being revised has -- what's the expression -- a fool for a client? Something like that.Which, of course, makes one think that those of us with Robert's 10.0 should be eligible for a reduced price to upgrade to version 11.0 since 95% of the text (fill in your own estimate) will remain unchanged. But that ain't gonna happen either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted September 14, 2010 at 06:21 PM Report Share Posted September 14, 2010 at 06:21 PM Yes, but "they" have been wrong before.And anyone who bets on the wording being revised has -- what's the expression -- a fool for a client? Something like that.Which, of course, makes one think that those of us with Robert's 10.0 should be eligible for a reduced price to upgrade to version 11.0 since 95% of the text (fill in your own estimate) will remain unchanged. But that ain't gonna happen either.No, this particular passage won't be revised, and anyone willing to wait for (a minimum of) another year to buy the book is being rather silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.