Re: Next step -- Deciding on output

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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
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

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

Browse spi-bylaws by date

  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