From: | Taral <taral(at)taral(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | spi-bylaws(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Next step -- Deciding on output |
Date: | 2003-02-04 22:32:08 |
Message-ID: | 20030204223208.GB1611@taral.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
Thread: | |
Lists: | spi-bylaws |
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 02:59:11PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote:
> The final resolution proposed is just an amendment to the Constitution. It
> does not state why it is being amended. Just "strike out clause x and in
> its place insert y". This is what people vote on. These documents don't
> have a "rationale section" or talk about history. So this one really should
> be separate. It probably won't read in a way that would be conducive to
> making these comments anyway.
Could have fooled me. Most full resolutions look like:
WHEREAS, <reasons for doing this>
RESOLVED, <things to do>.
Note that motions and resolutions are different. The secretary of SPI
has been (incorrectly) referring to motions as resolutions. That is
their prerogative.
P.S. I don't want anyone to get the idea that I'm bogged down in these
matters. I'm drafting my proposed changes right now. I just don't want
the final document to be in any way unclear, and I think the established
order provided by Robert's Rules and other references is quite
effective.
--
Taral <taral(at)taral(dot)net>
This message is digitally signed. Please PGP encrypt mail to me.
"Most parents have better things to do with their time than take care of
their children." -- Me
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Goerzen | 2003-02-05 19:08:53 | Re: Next step -- Deciding on output |
Previous Message | Taral | 2003-02-04 22:29:15 | Re: Next step -- Deciding on output |