Re: [registrars] Proposals for Rules for the Association

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>]

> Dear Rob:  You are correct, the precedence of motions puts an amendment
> ahead of the whole motion.  In a similar way, an amendment to an amendment
> has precedence over the amendment.

Not my point at all - this thread is now running dangerously close to
becoming what I feared most. Rather than discussing substantive points of
difference and agreement we are being quickly sucked into a discourse on the
semantics of Robert's Rules (the other Rob ;).

As I very explicitly mentioned earlier in response to Elana - I'm happy to
concede this point and deal with it if and when it comes up - I've withdrawn
my disagreement completely. Can we get back to the more productive
discussion concerning the various processes that Tim has tabled? Are there
any comments on the principles that Bruce Tonkin tabled regarding transfer's
last week? Does anyone have a followup to Bhavin's post from earlier today?

-rwr