|
Grex > Coop8 > #147: Minutes of the November 20 Board Meeting |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 20 new of 94 responses total. |
tsty
|
|
response 75 of 94:
| 
Dec 1 06:36 UTC 1996 |
and, fwiw, <for the sake of teh argument of 'age,'> the bible is 2000 yrs
old ... and still kickng.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 76 of 94:
|
Dec 1 18:03 UTC 1996 |
Not possible to use RRO to "draw on for bizarre interpretations of the rules".
RRO are all common sense, straightforward, and adaptable. The only time they
appear intricate to outsiders is when their function of balancing the power
of the majority and the rights of the minority must come into play.
|
scott
|
|
response 77 of 94:
|
Dec 1 19:49 UTC 1996 |
Rane, you don't think like a hacker. ;)
In any set of rules and procedures it is possible to exploit various
capabilities to screw things up. For example, the filibuster. Only a hacker
would have thought of using the "I can talk until I stop" rule to overflow
the collective buffers of the organization.
|
davel
|
|
response 78 of 94:
|
Dec 1 21:15 UTC 1996 |
And I stand by my statement that there's someone, um, there are those who
will interpret RRO in truly bizarre ways, for no discernable reason except
to waste time in argument, if we adopt it. That it's not open to reasonable
misconstrual, *even*if*true*, has nothing to do with the case.
Beyond that, what Scott said. My own reasons for opposing adoption of RRO
have almost nothing to do with this particular issue, except that I'd strongly
argue (& have) that the claimed advantages for doing so are
illusory-to-negligible in this case and at this point.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 79 of 94:
|
Dec 2 01:08 UTC 1996 |
We have seen evidence of people wating time in argument, here, over the
meaning of our bylaws, Michigan state law, etc. Most of those questions would
have been resolved immediately by RRO. Also, no one can waste time with RRO
because of the power of the chair to rule.
|
scott
|
|
response 80 of 94:
|
Dec 2 12:05 UTC 1996 |
Unless the chair wishes to waste time?
|
rcurl
|
|
response 81 of 94:
|
Dec 2 15:49 UTC 1996 |
The chair can waste time with or without RRO....organizations work better
if the chair is chosen wisely.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 82 of 94:
|
Dec 2 16:00 UTC 1996 |
do the bylaws give the chair absolute authority? RRO does I think but
again the bylaws dont reference RRO in any way.
|
scott
|
|
response 83 of 94:
|
Dec 2 16:19 UTC 1996 |
(The concept is that if we get to where people are deliberately wasting time,
then RRO will not help much. Parlimentary procedures will be the *least* of
our problems)
|
rcurl
|
|
response 84 of 94:
|
Dec 2 23:26 UTC 1996 |
The chair can rule an issue or a motion "out of order" under RRO. The
ruling of the chair can then be immediately appealed, and a vote is held
on whether the ruling of the chair will be sustained (the chair may
explain the ruling but debate is not allowed, and the majority wins). If
the chair's ruling is sustained, then the matter is settled, and the group
goes on to other business. (If not, the majority can go on haggling.) This
rule should not be used, of course, unless it is clear to the chair that
most everyone wants to move on. It also is somewhat heavy handed, so
needs to be used with discretion, but I have seen it used effectively to
stop board members that are making diversionary or non-relevant motions.
|
kerouac
|
|
response 85 of 94:
|
Dec 2 23:41 UTC 1996 |
whatever...grex would probably work better if scott was dictator
anyway hehe...less arguing!
btw, is scott running for chair for another year?
|
scott
|
|
response 86 of 94:
|
Dec 3 01:12 UTC 1996 |
Well, I didn't exactly run for chair last year, I volunteered and got stuck
with it. But if I was dictator, things would be different. Very different.
<evil smile>
|
robh
|
|
response 87 of 94:
|
Dec 3 06:19 UTC 1996 |
The three officers of the Board are chosen at the beginning of
each year. Whether scott is stupid^H^H^H^H^H^Hwilling to be
President again is up to him. >8)
|
tsty
|
|
response 88 of 94:
|
Dec 4 06:57 UTC 1996 |
<<<funny controls up there ....>>>
|
e4808mc
|
|
response 89 of 94:
|
Dec 6 03:00 UTC 1996 |
for what it's worth, there is another published set of procedures, written
especially for coops, that emphasises consensus and negotiation. Called
Welty's Book of Procedures. Might be worth looking at if you are going to
consider a formal set of procedures.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 90 of 94:
|
Dec 6 06:54 UTC 1996 |
Several users here don't want a formal set of anything - except unix. ;->
|
kerouac
|
|
response 91 of 94:
|
Dec 6 15:50 UTC 1996 |
Welty's mighjt be worth investigating...of course wouldnt want to get
all the libertarians around here upset
|
srw
|
|
response 92 of 94:
|
Dec 6 19:58 UTC 1996 |
Scott got to be chair because he didn't run away fast enough.
|
scott
|
|
response 93 of 94:
|
Dec 6 22:36 UTC 1996 |
It's not a bad job if you don't take it seriously. ;)
|
tsty
|
|
response 94 of 94:
|
Dec 7 07:49 UTC 1996 |
<<<<<<<,,look at all those controls>>>>>>>
|