[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [huml-comment] Request for a motion on PC-33 -Section 4.4.6-race
I'm following a variation of what I see in other public comment phases. The primary consideration is to get more feedback and stimulate discussion about specific issues. I chose this approach based on the notion that we need to develop an appropriate mechanism or procedure for what will be a fairly standard and repeating situation, with at least four more specifications in the works. We do follow Robert's Rules as a guide, as we need it. That's what a reapplicable rationale meant for me in a procedural sense. What Len came up with is a more focused criterion. Ciao, Rex At 10:48 AM -0800 12/3/02, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >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 : > >[ ... ] > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> -- Rex Brooks Starbourne Communications Design 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA 94702 *510-849-2309 http://www.starbourne.com * rexb@starbourne.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC