Re: [wg-d] Robert's Rules

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

> >Making anybody who wants to join a WG learn Robert's Rules might be a
> >little bit too much to ask from them.

I've been mentally watching the discussions (how's that for a mixed
metaphor) for the last two weeks and seeing how often we would have
actually invoked the Robert's procedures.

Certainly once, perhaps twice.

The first and definite time would have been the vote for co-chair.  And in
fact, what we did was pretty much what the rules would have indicated -
The chair called a vote, we held a vote, and the results were announced.

The second would have been that discussion over the expression of a clear
timebase for scheduling meetings and other events.

We had something that, to me, smelled like a consensus.  Someone could
have made a motion, giving specific language to a proposal on using dates,
someone else would (hopefully) have seconded.  (Absent a second, the
motion simply dies.)

The chair could then have announced that she perceived that her reading of
the group would been for, against, or unclear on the proposal.  In the
first two cases, her judgement would be presumed determinative but be open
for objection. If no objection were tendered in a reasonable time (perhaps
a day), then her judgement would stand.  Otherwise we'd have a vote while
discussion on other maters continued.

Notice how there is that determination by the chair as to the consensus.
If there is a true consensus, then there will be no objection and hence no
vote.  If there is a lack of consensus or there are reasons to be unsure
that the chair measured it correctly, the request for a vote triggers a
clear process to eliminate the ambiguity.

Thus Roberts provides an extremely speedy path when there is true
consensus and provides a fair and accountable path when there is not.

As far as the burden of Robert's Rules during periods of discussion --
They don't interfere with electronic discussion.  Nothing happens
until somebody makes a specific motion, i.e. creates a decision point.

		--karl--