SUO: RE: Motion to Reconsider the vote on SUMO motion
Bob and SUO Working Group,
Bob's appeal is not allowed for the following reason.
Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (10th Edition) states: "Chapter
VIII; Section 24. Appeal; Paragraph 2(b): "when the chair rules on a
question about which there cannot possibly be two reasonable opinions, an
appeal would be dilatory and is not allowed."
Bob, I do not see any reasonable basis for a different ruling. If you
do, please explain.
Jim Schoening
Chair,
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Grayson Spillers
To: Schoening, James R CECOM DCSC4I
Cc: ''Standard-Upper-Ontology ' '; Lowell G Johnson (E-mail)
Sent: 9/28/01 11:51 PM
Subject: Re: Motion to Reconsider the vote on SUMO motion
Jim,
Once again you have ruled against my motion to reconsider the SUMO vote.
I
appeal the chair's decision to the members of the SUO.
Bob
"Schoening, James R CECOM DCSC4I" wrote:
> Bob and SUO WG,
>
> I have been advised by Mr. Lowell Johnson, Computer Society
(CS) VP
> for Standards (and Chair of CS Standards Activity Board, our next
higher
> body, and the person to whom appeals are made), to not wait for
further
> guidance from IEEE, but to proceed with an attempt to resolve the SUMO
vote
> issue at the Chair level.
>
> Therefore, I will backtrack to the point where I denied Bob
> Spiller's motion to reconsider the SUMO vote. I had given two
reasons, but
> will withdraw the one regarding the timeliness of his motion. But
this does
> not change the outcome, as the other reason still causes the motion to
be
> out of order.
>
> Background: On Aug 16, I posted the results of the SUMO vote (YES=17;
> NO=16; ABSTAIN=9) stating the motion passed. On Aug 17, Bob made the
> following motion:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Grayson Spillers
> To: 'Standard-Upper-Ontology '
> Sent: 8/18/01 12:07 AM
> Subject: SUO: Motion to Reconsider the vote on SUMO motion
>
> Jim,
> I move to reconsider the vote on the SUMO motion.
>
> Bob
>
> =========End of Bob's message================
>
> My revised response is:
>
> Bob,
>
> Your motion to reconsider the SUMO vote is out of order
because you
> voted NO on this ballot, which was not "with the prevailing side."
Robert's
> Rules of Order Newly Revised (10th Edition) states:
>
> "Chapter IX,
> ~37. Reconsider
> Reconsider--a motion of America origin--enables a
majority
> in an assembly, within a limited time and without notice, to bring
back for
> further consideration a motion which has already been voted on. The
purpose
> of reconsidering a vote is to permit correction of hasty, ill-advised,
or
> erroneous action, or to take into account added information or a
changed
> situation that has developed since the taking of the vote.
> To provide both usefulness and protection against
abuse, the
> motion to Reconsider has the following unique characteristics:
> a) It can be made only by a member who voted with the
prevailing
> side. In other words, a reconsideration can be moved only by one who
voted
> aye if the motion involved was adopted, or no if the motion was lost.
(In
> standing and special committees, the motion to Reconsider can be made
by any
> member who did not vote on the losing side--including one who did not
vote
> at all."
>
>
> Please respond with any questions or issues
>
> Jim Schoening
> Chair, SUO WG
<<Card for Robert Grayson Spillers>>