[865] in UA Senate
Re: Agenda for 42 UAS 4
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rachel E Meyer)
Sun Oct 24 14:52:53 2010
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 14:52:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rachel E Meyer <remeyer@MIT.EDU>
To: "Adam Bockelie (UA History Committee Chair)" <ua-history-chairs@mit.edu>
cc: ua-senate-officers@mit.edu, ua-senate@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <4CC4763F.1030700@mit.edu>
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
---1257051904-764526980-1287946255=:31213
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=ISO-8859-15; FORMAT=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Content-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1010241451091.31213@dr-wily.mit.edu>
I'm aware, but I wrote another bill because it is an issue again and the=20
presiding officers weren't responsive to my attempts to start less formal=
=20
discussions on this.
Additionally, I'd probably be for adding a "for the remainder of this=20
session" clause like I put in the minutes bill. Next year if the=20
Speaker/Vice-Speaker don't want laptops used and the Senators don't=20
disagree then that's fine. I just don't think that's the case this year.
If people have other points or questions about either 4.3 or 4.4 let me=20
know or reply all. I think they're fairly straightforward so it makes=20
more sense to address any questions/comments than to explain everything=20
out.
-Rachel
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010, Adam Bockelie (UA History Committee Chair) wrote:
> 42 UAS 4.4 (laptops) has basically already been passed. see 39 UAS 4.8 [=
]
>
> On 10/23/2010 10:45 PM, Jont=E9 Craighead (UA Speaker) wrote:
>> Hi, everyone:
>>=20
>> Please find linked below the agenda for 42 UAS 4. We will not have a
>> guest speaker this week.
>>=20
>> http://web.mit.edu/ua/senate/UAS42/agendas/2010-10-25.pdf
>>=20
>> You will likely notice a few changes in the agenda, which I have
>> outlined below/:
>> /
>>
>> * *Suggested times for business on the agenda*
>> o Since the agenda is never formally adopted by Senate, a call
>> for the "Orders of the Day" is never in order according to
>> Roberts' Rules. I have included a note on the agenda this
>> week to make this clear, but this should be implicit with
>> any agenda submitted going forward. Our agenda stands only
>> to establish the order of items at the meeting in accordance
>> with the Bylaws.
>> * *Discussion follows all scheduled business*
>> o Based on feedback, we decided to try this measure this week
>> (it has been done in the past). Everyone should be aware
>> that having discussion at the end of the meeting can
>> discourage direct student feedback--it can quite often be
>> too late to reasonably expect other students to attend.
>> * *New Business section prior to open discussion*
>> o The Bylaws do not specifically prohibit new business at
>> meetings. As a result, we have explicitly added a section
>> where members may introduce new main motions that did not
>> make the agenda. Given that Senators should solicit feedback
>> from their constituents before voting, I would strongly
>> discourage the introduction of legislation that others' have
>> not had the proper time to read and consider. To introduce
>> new business, simply introduce a motion before we move into
>> discussion mode.
>>=20
>> Please let me know if you have any questions--I expect that these
>> changes will help Senate run more smoothly, but I would very much like
>> to hear any opinions to the contrary.
>>=20
>> Thanks,
>> Jont=E9 Craighead
>>=20
>> Speaker of the Senate
>> MIT Undergraduate Association
>> Course 1C: Class of 2013
>
> --=20
> Adam Bockelie
> 801.209.7233
> <ua-history-chairs@mit.edu>
>
> MIT Undergraduate Association
> Chair, Committee on History
>
>
---1257051904-764526980-1287946255=:31213--
