[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: Re: Robert's rules (Re: [ga] Blockage/delay of postings)
Mark Langston wrote:
>Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's obvious you're taking an extreme position
>(detuctio ad absurdum, I believe) to avoid dealing with this.
My point is that we cannot just pick the Roberts Rules "as they are",
because they have been written for a different context.
The consequence is, IMHO, not that we should dismiss the matter but,
quite the opposite, that we should define a specically designed set.
This in reply to a previous posting that stated that RR is good "as is",
and that it can be used starting now without modification.
>I did serious work to adopt those rules. Don't make believe you're
>to go over the same ground flippantly here.
The very fact that you did serious work on it means that you also
believe that they have to be adapted to fit:
- today's reality (Y2K+)
- the different medium (online debate)
I'm sorry for you, but we agree ;>).