nor thern wrote:
propose vote on removal of the section 9 bylaw at next
"9 PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY
This is definitely worth discussing.
By the way, for those who did not attend, we accepted the
minimally-altered by-laws last night. I will post them on our web in a
few minutes. A good meeting, lots of folks, including first-timer
Charlie, who was preached to heavily about distributions. Mike gave a
great presentation on controlling LCD displays within Linux.
Anyway, Mr. Thern, what I am hearing is that you are saying that we
should not follow Robert's Rules of Order?
I can understand folks feeling that way. I have watched the arguments
in meetings hundreds of times, as people try to discuss things without
shouting each other down, interspersed with others crying out various
points of RRO that may or may not apply... eventually, they are
arguing about arguing.
Personally, I am 100% convinced that following parliamentary procedure
works. I have seen it in action over 14 years of meetings at another
hobbyist organization. It definitely can help, when properly used.
However,
There are 2 major problems here:
1.) It only works if the procedure is understood, to a reasonable
extent, by all members present
2.) If we do not have a Parliamentarian, we don't stand much chance of
actually doing this
For those who do not know, there is such a thing as actually being
certified as a Parliamentarian. I am vague on the procedure, but I
will leave it to others to research it if necessary - should be easy
to find.
This is, again, one of those items that allows expansion for the
future - and I am personally not concerned if it is in there and not
followed. With that said,
1.) Are there any registered Parliamentarians already in the group?
2.) Would anyone like to become one?
3.) We can certainly take a vote to remove the offending clause next
month.
--
"Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause."
Victor Hugo (1802-1885)
Be sure to visit our web at www.ncolug.org
