[wplug-plan] Re: [wplug] Bylaws

[David Tessitor]

Actually, RR does provide for exactly that sort of flexibility.  It's used as
a back up if something unforeseen comes up and an orderly way of proceeding
is needed.  It's sort of a how-to that covers more than you'll probably ever
need to know about, but is nice to have there if you ever do.

You're right we don't need to argue about RR.  But the procedures for
decision making need to be considered as part of bylaws development,
especially if one is establishing something non-standard for process.  Most
groups take a minimalist approach and simply list RR as the parliamentary
process.  Actually, there is a middle ground that is taking a minimalist
approach on the bylaws and using standing rules for procedural
considerations.  Rules are a much easier process to set up and revise, and,
except for some extremely important matters that should be in the bylaws, are
the best place to deal with most minor procedural issues which are the
majority of matters you might have in mind.  This way we can get up and going
and make adjustments without a lot of hassle as their needs make themselves
evident.

Discussion on the list of the product from the first three organizational
meetings is a good place to begin.  An agreeable decision and ratification
process can grow out of the list and meeting discussions.

Dave

====================

Jonathan Billings wrote:

> I'm not against RR for business meetings, as long as we modified them to
> be less formal, and cut out some of the cruft that is useless with our
> online capabilities (no need to read the previous meetings minutes, only
> highlights relevant to the current meeting).  But really, what does RR do
> for the LUG?  Not much, because currently, there is no chair/president to
> run the business meetings.  So arguing about RR is pointless.  We need to
> decide on revising the bylaws.