Calling for abstentions

[Guest George Beall]

Page 43 line 25-27 says the chair should not call for abstentions. The "should" in that makes me ask if that would be interpreted as a "must", or simply that it's bad practice although allowed?

[Dan Honemann]

Page 43 line 25-27 says the chair should not call for abstentions. The "should" in that makes me ask if that would be interpreted as a "must", or simply that it's bad practice although allowed?

It means that calling for abstentions is improper.

[Guest Nancy N.]

What Dan is trying to say in his hyperpolysyllabic way is, it won't kill ya. Unless from embarrassment. In which case yer much too easily killed, you should get over it.

[Gary Novosielski]

Calling for abstentions marks you as a chair who does not know the rules. Since knowing the rules is a primary qualification for a chair, that's not something you want to be marked as.

If you insist on calling for abstentions, one way that might at least be less improper than some others is:

Those in favor say Aye....

Those opposed say No....

Those who wish to abstain, remain absolutely silent.

See how silly that seems? Whether you call for abstentions or not, those who remain silent have, in fact, abstained. If you enjoy calling for abstentions, you might also like asking those who are absent to raise their hands.

[David A Foulkes]

Those who wish to abstain, remain absolutely silent.

Of course, if the vote is a rising or raised hand vote, there's a wrinkle. Voters would be identified, by which I mean other members would see who they are, and the count would/could be taken (as improper and meaningless as that might be), and maybe even entered in the minutes (as improper as that would be).

Otherwise, you make a good point.

[hmtcastle]

Of course, if the vote is a rising or raised hand vote, there's a wrinkle.

All those in favor, raise your wrinkled right hand.

All those opposed, raise your wrinkled left hand.

If you choose to abstain, raise both wrinkled hands.

To simply abstain, sit on both of your wrinkled hands.

[Gary Novosielski]

Of course, if the vote is a rising or raised hand vote, there's a wrinkle. Voters would be identified, by which I mean other members would see who they are, and the count would/could be taken (as improper and meaningless as that might be), and maybe even entered in the minutes (as improper as that would be).

Otherwise, you make a good point.

I that case, the procedure could be:

Those in favor will rise/be seated...

Those opposed will rise/be seated...

Those who wish to abstain will refrain from doing anything that might identify them.