[786] in UA Senate
Re: Bill to Save Time
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anthony Rindone)
Thu Sep 30 10:16:04 2010
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1009300031390.21610@dr-wily.mit.edu>
From: Anthony Rindone <arindone136@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:15:39 -0400
To: Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@mit.edu>
Cc: Timothy Robertson <tim_r@mit.edu>, William Steadman <willst@mit.edu>,
Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>, ua-senate@mit.edu
There is a motion to suspend the rules that requires 2/3 vote...no
need to really make a bill in my opinion.
Quick reference of motions here. http://www.robertsrules.org/motions.htm
-Tony
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@mit.edu> wrote:
> http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=3Droberts+rules
>
> HTHHAND,
> --
> Geoffrey Thomas
> geofft@mit.edu
>
> On Thu, 30 Sep 2010, Timothy Robertson wrote:
>
>> Correct me if I am wrong, but is there not a process that we can go
>> through to temporarily suspend a rule during the
>> discussion?
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 12:23 AM, William Steadman <willst@mit.edu> wrot=
e:
>> =A0 =A0 =A0=A0I will strike "he shall provide them to the senate" if you=
wish.
>> Then it reads "Speaker makes rules he
>> =A0 =A0 =A0wants and if people don't like it they can use Roberts Rules.=
He does
>> not need to write any rules. If he
>> =A0 =A0 =A0wants, he'll just say we're using Roberts Rules as is.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0In my view, we can use Roberts Rules as a basis and make
>> modifications. For example, every time we "divided
>> =A0 =A0 =A0the body" Jonte spent a minute to count that an overwhelming =
majority
>> was for the bill. That will happen
>> =A0 =A0 =A0every meeting and is entirely unnecessary. Perhaps its not in=
Roberts
>> Rules, but I don't know. I don't want
>> =A0 =A0 =A0to read it all to find out. We can still "divide the body"/ca=
ll for a
>> hand vote, but don't need to count.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0Also, we should move straight to voting for bills and skip en=
ding
>> debate, unless somebody objects.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0Will
>>
>>
>>
>> On 09/30/2010 12:07 AM, Alex Dehnert wrote:
>> =A0 =A0 =A0On 09/29/2010 11:16 PM, William Steadman wrote:
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Since I felt we spent too much time at the last m=
eeting, this
>> bill
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0removes us following Roberts Rules of Order and l=
ets the
>> Speaker decide
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0which parliamentary procedure to follow. If 5 sen=
ators object
>> to his
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0method we return to Roberts Rules of Order.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0It mostly speaks for itself. I like the quote by =
the GSC.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Happy to change it,
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Will
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Bill to Save Time
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Whereas: 15 minutes were wasted in meeting 42 U.A=
.S 1 on a
>> point of
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0order, and in general by unessecary parliamentary=
procedure.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Whereas: The G.S.C. ammended their consitution vi=
a bill 51
>> G.S.C. 9.2
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0which specificly states ``The G.S.C. The Bylaws c=
urrently state
>> that
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Roberts Rules of Order should be used as a means =
of
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0maintaining order at Council meetings. However, t=
hese rules of
>> order are
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0very
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0complicated, requiring formal motions to be made =
for even the
>> most minor
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0of things.
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Experience has shown that attempting to follow Ro=
berts Rules
>> leads to
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0confusion and
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0inefficiency. This amendment removes the restrict=
ion for using
>> Roberts
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Rules, and
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0instead simply states that the =93presiding offic=
er shall follow
>> a
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Parliamentary procedure to
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0be made available to the Council=94.''
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Whereas: The Speaker already interprets Roberts R=
ules of Order.
>>
>>
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0It is resolved that: Article IV Section B subsect=
ion 1 is
>> ammended to
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0say ``Any aspect of parliamentary procedure or ru=
les not
>> covered by
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0these Bylaws or the UA Constitution shall be dete=
rmined by the
>> speaker.
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0They will make this procedure available to the Se=
nate. If
>> durring a
>>
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0AIUI, that boils down to "the Speaker should write some rules=
of
>> order, and give them to the Senate",
>> =A0 =A0 =A0which seems... excessive. Writing a good set of parliamentary=
rules
>> seems annoyingly time consuming.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0RONR has the advantage that it's widely used, so it tends to =
be the
>> thing people are most likely to
>> =A0 =A0 =A0know ("most likely" may not mean much, admittedly), you can f=
ind good
>> teaching and reference
>> =A0 =A0 =A0materials, and the details have been looked at enough to be s=
ane.
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0I don't think Monday's incident was typical, and I think that=
as
>> Jonte grows more used to running
>> =A0 =A0 =A0meetings, he'll grow better at using RONR in a way that moves=
the
>> meeting forward without being
>> =A0 =A0 =A0perceived as interfering with anyone's ability to be fairly h=
eard
>> (through speech and/or voting).
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0senate meeting, 5 senators object to the method o=
f
>> parliamentary
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0procedure, then the Speaker will defer to Roberts=
Rules of
>> Order (latest
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0addtion) for the remainder of the meeting.''
>>
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0~~Alex
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tim Robertson II
>> MIT 2010
>> Mechanical Engineering
>> 602-738-1196
>> UA Senate Office Hours:
>> B515 Sunday 5-8pm
>>
>>
>
