Next step -- Deciding on output

Taral taral at
Tue Feb 4 22:32:08 UTC 2003

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>
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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the Spi-bylaws mailing list