From rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Thu Oct 11 12:58:56 2007 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list llg-members); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:58:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rlpowell by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Ig4BK-0004ic-RC for llg-members@lojban.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:58:56 -0700 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:58:54 -0700 From: Robin Lee Powell To: llg-members@lojban.org Subject: [llg-members] Re: LLG AGM 2007: New Business Message-ID: <20071011195854.GU13890@digitalkingdom.org> Mail-Followup-To: llg-members@lojban.org References: <20070918181955.GW10667@nvg.org> <20071010000942.GZ10376@digitalkingdom.org> <20071011190654.GO13890@digitalkingdom.org> <20071011191901.GR13890@digitalkingdom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) X-archive-position: 369 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: llg-members-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: rlpowell@digitalkingdom.org Precedence: bulk Reply-to: llg-members@lojban.org X-list: llg-members On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 03:52:33PM -0400, Matt Arnold wrote: > On 10/11/07, Robin Lee Powell wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 03:15:23PM -0400, Matt Arnold wrote: > > > > > > I cast my vote in favor of recognizing xorlo as more correct > > > than CLL. > > > > Noted, but we're not actually voting yet; as this is clearly > > both discussable and amendable, it is now opet for discussion > > and motions to amend and so on; again, see > > http://www.csuchico.edu/sac/parliament.html#VI for a summary of > > procedure at this point. > > Two questions regarding parlaimentary procedure by email. > > 1. How long until debate closes and you conclude that everyone who > did not speak was given the chance to do so? Is there a deadline? Normally I would have declared a deadline, yes. In this case, I've decided to try letting the discussion come to its own conclusion. This may be a mistake; the President is welcome to over-rule me. In any case, if it's still going strong in a week or two, I'll set a deadline then. Just for the record: At any time, a member may call to take an immediate vote on a motion. Such a motion, once seconded, is not debatable in any fashion; an immediate vote occurs. If a 2/3 majority votes yes, the main motion is immediately voted upon. > 2. When the vote is cast, if I have not withdrawn my statement, > will it be counted as a cast vote? If not, may it? I will count it as such unless you direct me otherwise in the meantime. However, if the main motion is amended, as seems likely, you'll have to vote again. -Robin -- Lojban Reason #17: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo Proud Supporter of the Singularity Institute - http://singinst.org/ http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/