Guest Tuck Posted January 25, 2011 at 04:58 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 04:58 PM We have legally called a meeting of our church by gathering signatures. We have since been asked to delay it for 6 weeks (or cancel it). We are reluctantly willing to delay it but want to do it properly in order to keep the original meeting request intact for a specified date in March. I need some sound advice on how to proceed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:02 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:02 PM We have legally called a meeting of our church by gathering signatures. We have since been asked to delay it for 6 weeks (or cancel it). We are reluctantly willing to delay it but want to do it properly in order to keep the original meeting request intact for a specified date in March. I need some sound advice on how to proceed.You can't delay or cancel it but you can meet at the scheduled time and adjourn ("continue") it to a more convenient date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:15 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:15 PM And, conveniently, you won't need a quorum present to "Fix the time to which to adjourn" (RONR, pp. 336 & 234) so you could save people some effort by telling then that is what will happen on the originally scheduled meeting date, and, thus, they needed bother to show up. But this isn't foolproof. If a quorum of members show up anyway and a majority want to take up the business then and there, there is nothing you can do about that. Be prepared! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tuck Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:53 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:53 PM You can't delay or cancel it but you can meet at the scheduled time and adjourn ("continue") it to a more convenient date.Thank you. Can you give me a refernece within the RROO booklet that would back this up please? I am sure there will be some who will need the in "black and white" version... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:55 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 05:55 PM Thank you. Can you give me a refernece within the RROO booklet that would back this up please? I am sure there will be some who will need the in "black and white" version...Mr. Stackpole cited the appropriate reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:15 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:15 PM What "booklet" are you looking at and referring to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tuck Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:23 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:23 PM What "booklet" are you looking at and referring to?I have the "revised" version printed in 1979 from my local library. I know it is really dated but can this issue be properly referenced from this edition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jstackpo Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:39 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:39 PM Could you give us the bibliographic material - verso of the title page (commonly)? And the full title/publisher from the title page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:50 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 06:50 PM I have the "revised" version printed in 1979 from my local library. I know it is really dated but can this issue be properly referenced from this edition?You could try looking in the index for "Fix the Time to Which to Adourn" and "Quorum: action that can be taken in absence of". Or words to that effect. After all, you've got the book in front of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tuck Posted January 25, 2011 at 07:02 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 07:02 PM Could you give us the bibliographic material - verso of the title page (commonly)? And the full title/publisher from the title page.Sure. Robert, M. Henry General, Robert's Rules of Order Revised, New York, Morrow Quill Paperbacks, 1979. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Goldsworthy Posted January 25, 2011 at 07:13 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 07:13 PM Sure. Robert, M. Henry General, Robert's Rules of Order Revised, New York, Morrow Quill Paperbacks, 1979.Oy!Your copy is slightly out of date.Like about 100 years.You appear to hold your hand the FOURTH EDITION of 1915.R.O.R. is not quite the same as RONR.Close, but no cigar.If you do have a later edition of R.O.R., then the best chance you have is a 1951 SIXTH EDITION.But I don't think Morrow Quill had been printing a still-under-copyright-control version of R.O.R.Morrow Quill, I am guessing, is printing the PUBLIC DOMAIN version (1915 4th ed.) of R.O.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 25, 2011 at 08:48 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 08:48 PM Sure. Robert, M. Henry General, Robert's Rules of Order Revised, New York, Morrow Quill Paperbacks, 1979.Try Section 16, "Fix the Time to which the Assembly shall Adjourn", and Section 64, "Quorum". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Martin Posted January 25, 2011 at 10:22 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 10:22 PM Could you give us the bibliographic material - verso of the title page (commonly)? And the full title/publisher from the title page.Sure. Robert, M. Henry General, Robert's Rules of Order Revised, New York, Morrow Quill Paperbacks, 1979.There is no 1979 edition of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised and the publisher at that time was Scott, Foresman and Company. What you likely have is Robert's Rules of Order, Revised, 4th edition (1915). Since this edition is now in the public domain, there are plenty of printings and knockoffs of it. If you're going to use that out-of-date text, you may as well use the online version of it.Of course, in the long run you should really get The Right Book. While much has remained the same, there have been some changes since 1915. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 25, 2011 at 10:27 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 10:27 PM Sure. Robert, M. Henry General, Robert's Rules of Order Revised, New York, Morrow Quill Paperbacks, 1979.I wonder if this M. Henry Robert could be related to the famous Henry M. Robert of song and story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmtcastle Posted January 25, 2011 at 10:54 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 10:54 PM There is no 1979 edition of Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised and the publisher at that time was Scott, Foresman and Company. What you likely have is Robert's Rules of Order, Revised, 4th edition (1915). Since this edition is now in the public domain, there are plenty of printings and knockoffs of it. If you're going to use that out-of-date text, you may as well use the online version of it.Although the Morrow Quill paperback features a forward by Henry M. Robert III so I suppose it's more "authorized" than most printings and knockoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Novosielski Posted January 25, 2011 at 11:00 PM Report Share Posted January 25, 2011 at 11:00 PM Although the Morrow Quill paperback features a forward by Henry M. Robert III so I suppose it's more "authorized" than most printings and knockoffs.It does say that.And that picture of the cover confirms that is the "classic 1915 edition" of ROR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.