| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Please submit the question to the members.
Bob
"Schoening, James R CECOM DCSC4I" wrote:
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 motionJim,
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>>
begin:vcard n:Spillers;Robert Grayson tel;work:650-851-1135 x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:Spillers Consulting adr:;;136 Bardet Road ;Woodside;California;94062;USA version:2.1 email;internet:skydog@pacbell.net fn:Robert Grayson Spillers end:vcard