Re: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)

[Joe Baptista <baptista@pccf.net>]

Do you have a url Karl - for those revised rules?  Personally I think
Robert's rules as they exist are in order - and with a voting booth we can
amend them as we go.  Impliment what has worked for year - change
later.  The assembly will have that power under the rules.

The nice thing about roberts rules is that no one needs to do any thinking
about rules and censorship and new fangled methods of user verification -
because it's all been looked after.

Trust your ancestors gentlemen - because I can bypass your listservers ;-)

Regards
Joe Baptista

On Thu, 6 Jan 2000, Karl Auerbach wrote:

> 
> > I don't believe this is appropriate for a mailing list, due to the 
> > multistranded nature of mailing list discussions, but those who ask for 
> > Robert's rules of order should be ready to accept the consequences.
> 
> In WG-D we had a long discussion on Roberts Rules, a reasonable derivative
> appropriate for e-mail discussions was presented and largely (but,
> of course not universally) agreed to.
> 
> I, for one, believe that we ought to be using, at least in the working
> group context, rules derived from Roberts Rules.
> 
> 		--karl--
> 
> 
> 
> 
>