RE: Bob Grow's proposed rewording of the ++PROPOSED RULE CHANGE LETTER BALLOT
Why is the non-technical motion governed explicitly by Robert's Rules, as
you proposed. All order is governed by Robert's Rules, even technical
motions, although our "by-laws" specify that 75 % support is need for such
motion to pass.
So, why do you want to add the qualification?
> From: Tony Jeffree[SMTP:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 1999 07:53
> To: email@example.com
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: Bob Grow's proposed rewording of the ++PROPOSED RULE
> CHANGE LETTER BALLOT
> At 15:07 07/10/99 -0400, email@example.com wrote:
> >I wholeheartedly agree with Bob's words. I would additionally add one
> >additional paragraph that explicitly states that "Voting on non-technical
> >is governed by Robert's Rules of order". You may or may not want to put
> >paragraph following Bob's words, or where it is indicated that the chair
> >which issues are technical and which are not.
> An observation.
> I know that some working groups enjoy the adversarial atmosphere that can
> be generated by clever manipulation of meetings and the over-use of
> procedural mechanisms such as are embodied in Robert's Rules.
> 802.1 has not been one of those working groups; our operational approach
> has been to attempt to resolve issues rather than to invoke procedures. If
> there is an issue, taking a vote or indulging in procedural devices will
> not make it go away, so it is a smart move to resolve the issue first.
> vote then becomes the formal confirmation, rather thatn the attempted
> of achieving resolution. Consequently, in the time I have been attending
> 802.1 meetings (since 1984), I cannot recall any occasion where it was
> either desirable or necessary to invoke Roberts Rules. For these reasons,
> while I would in no way object to other working groups making use of RR as
> they see fit, I would be very concerned if Robert's Rules were enshrined
> the operating rules of 802 as the basis for making decisions in WG