RE: [huml-comment] Request for a motion on PC-33 -Section 4.4.6-race

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

The way this is handled in Roberts Rules is that a motion to reconsider must
be made by someone who was on the prevailing side the last time the motion
was voted on.  This is a design for prevention of endless reiteration.  (It
is also one basis for a well-known congressional practice of going with the
winning side once it is clear which way the wind is blowing.)

It is a very simple procedure.  Something that might be useful to you.

It doesn't exactly fit what you are doing -- responding to comments received
in public review -- but it might serve if you have a concern about
re-opening old debates.

I don't know what a "reapplicable rationale" is, so I have nothing further
to offer.

I don't want to discuss TC policy either.

-- Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Rex Brooks [mailto:rexb@starbourne.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 06:20
To: rkthunga@humanmarkup.org; humanmarkup-comment@lists.oasis-open.org;
humanmarkup@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [huml-comment] Request for a motion on PC-33 -Section
4.4.6-race


Hi Ranjeeth,

I am copying the TC lists with this request with the proviso, or
caveat, that it is intended for you alone, but was not appropriate as
a private communication on so important an issue. So, the public and
lurkers on the TC lists should not consider this an invitation for a
discussion on TC policy.

 As far as a reapplicable rationale is concerned, I think you
could state that as :

[ ... ]