Next step -- Deciding on output
taral at taral.net
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
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.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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://spi-inc.org/pipermail/spi-bylaws/attachments/20030204/1903c936/attachment.pgp
More information about the Spi-bylaws