Re: Do I have a second? Re: Motion on decoration bit to verify continuity
> Subject: Re: Do I have a second? Re: Motion on decoration bit to verify continuity
> From: John Pryce <j.d.pryce@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 14:08:55 +0100
> To: P1788 <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Nate, Baker , Officers
>
> I'm going to send this round the officers for their views on procedure.
(I reply to everyone on grounds that they
might as well hear the answer too. :-)
>
> On 11 Sep 2010, at 21:20, Nate Hayes wrote:
> > If you would be willing to change the proposal from "discontinuous"
> to "defined and continuous," then I would proffer an ethusiastic second
> to the motion. Otherwise, I fear my vote would be a reluctant "no" if
> this change is not made.
>
> It seems to me that under Roberts' rules there is a tailor-made way to
> handle this. You propose the above change as an Amendment. You will
> obviously kick off the discussion with your reasons for the change.
> Whichever way the vote goes on that, I will accept the democratic
> result and would be happy for one of us to be proposer and the other
> be second on the (amended or unamended) motion. Will you agree the same?
Yes, John, that is EXACTLY the correct Robert's Rules
course of action.
The sequence is:
(1) You propose a motion.
(2) It is seconded. (I will second it right now to move
things along.)
(3) During the discussion period (which I guess we are in
right now), Nate proposes his amendment.
(4) Nate's amendment is seconded. (I will also second that
if only to give it a fair hearing.)
(5) Your original motion is tabled while the amendment is
discussed.
(6) The amendment is voted on. If it passes it becomes
part of the motion. If it does not, the motion remains
as you proposed it.
(7) The motion (amended or not) is taken off the table &
discussion resumes. Additional amendments may be made.
(8) The motion (amended or not) is voted on.
(9) We all move on to other things in our lives.
>
> (I'm not sure: if the amendment goes Nate's way, does he become the
> owner of the amended motion?)
>
> Regards
>
> John
No, you are the owner of the motion either way. Nate is
the owner of the amendment. The seconders just get to
see their name in the big book. (Mine is always last
alphabetically. Its a genetic thing. I get it from my
father. :-)
In ordinary parliamentary procedure there would also be
the issue of whether it was a vote decided by the chairman
on hearing the yeas & nays or whether someone questioned
the chairman's judgement & called for the roll to record
each vote by name.
But in our 21st century environment our secretary gets
the names of each voter along with the vote. So as long
as that information is archived somewhere it will be
there for future historians to have fun with.
Ain't parliamentary procedure fun?
I can't wait until someone calls a point of order...
Dan
BTW, a point of order is how you tell people that Nate
should be making an amendment. :-)