Re: Questions about the process rules

["Eve L. Maler" <eve.maler@East.Sun.COM>]

At 08:58 AM 1/10/01 -0800, Jon Bosak wrote:
>[eve.maler@east.sun.com:]
>
>| - If a PEOTCP can only attend part of a single meeting, how does
>| that count towards their good standing?  Is the initial meeting a
>| special case?  E.g., they attend the first hour of a two-hour
>| telecon that serves as the initial meeting of a TC, are they a
>| voting member?
>
>I think so, based on the observation that initial attendance
>usually gets one into the minutes.

Makes sense to me...

>| - The bylaws don't specify a particular revision of Robert's
>| Rules.  Is there a favored one?  I'm studying both the
>| Constitution Society's version (http://www.constitution.org) and
>| Darwin Patnode's 1989 revision of the 1876 original, and so far I
>| prefer the former.  If I get installed as chair, I'd like to be
>| able to point to a particular revision up front to forestall
>| arguments.
>
>The bylaws actually do specify a particular version, though that's
>not immediately apparent unless you're used to the wording used in
>the boilerplate.  The formula
>
>    Robert's Rules of Order, as such rules may be revised from time
>    to time
>
>is generally understood to reference the current (ninth) edition
>of the series continuously published since 1876.  So if a matter
>of procedure ever gets appealed to the OASIS board, this is the
>edition I would expect to see used as the final authority.
>
>As a practical matter, however, I think you should use the
>electronic version of the 1915 edition that's available from the
>Constitution Society.  See the excerpt below from an article I
>published on xml.com last year for more on this.

I've been using and studying it, and it's my favorite so far.  Glad to hear 
it's held in high regard by you too -- makes it an easy choice.

         Eve
--
Eve Maler                                          +1 781 442 3190
Sun Microsystems XML Technology Center    eve.maler @ east.sun.com