So well put!

Again, another excellent posting. Too bad Mr. Steve does not take these postings and learn from them. The neighborhood needs more people like you to participate.

at last

wsmith - you are truly a voice in the wilderness. could not agree more with your thoughtful analysis. i was unable to attend the meeting but from the reports i got, you were right on in your thoughtful, logical comments. let me ask for your opinion on this: should the chair express his/her opinion as openly as the chair at the meeting you attended was reported to have done, or should the chair remain neutral during discussions on the floor?

another question for the NSNA, who is the person referred to during discussion of robert's rules? who is the inhouse expert?

wsmith - keep it up!!!

By Frankly

RR of Order

Frankly, Thank you for your kind words.

RR of Order states (quote):
''The chairman sometimes calls a member to the chair and takes part in the debate. This should rarely be done, and nothing can justify it in a case where much feeling is shown and there is a liability to difficulty in preserving order. If the chairman has even the appearance of being a partisan, he loses much of his ability to control those who are on the opposite side of the question. There is nothing to justify the unfortunate habit some chairmen have of constantly speaking on questions before the assembly, even interrupting the member who has the floor. One who expects to take an active part in debate should never accept the chair, or at least should not resume the chair, after having made his speech, until after the pending question is disposed of.1 The presiding officer of a large assembly should never be chosen for any reason except his ability to preside.''
Quoted from RRoR, http://www.constitution.org/rror/rror--00.htm
Article X.58

As to the second question, the answer is found in the same Article X also, in the description of the Chairman/President.

Good luck reading....I tend to fall asleep if I read too much of RRoR..hahaha.

chair

WSmith, thank you for your very valuable contribution. I would like to point out however, that the first meeting (this Sept meeting) you attended was in no way a typical meeting. A very unique set of circumstances was at play. The presiding officer removed himself from the situation as soon as possible, probably to avoid inflaming the situation further. Then this put another officer unexpectedly in as chair of the meeting. To criticize this person, who has often been a good last minute chair, may not be fair. It was clearly an awkward moment and the confusion in the crowd and the initial silence made it more awkward.
If you had been here and coming to these meetings (and special meetings and NDR meetings, etc) for the last six months or so I think you would have been more aware of the tensions at play and realize that, under the circumstances, probably everybody did the best thing they could have to avoid a really out of control meeting.

Years ago, NSNA, had a member who attended the meetings and was a RRO expert but I can't remember who it was. There has been discussion over the yearrs about RRO and if they are too restrictive- if they stifle creative discussion. I've got mixed feeling but it is something that needs to be discussed.