Robert's Rules Experts:What Could Have Been Done to Prevent the Incident in Clarke County?

[Matt Davidson]

Luckily most of the convention is captured on video and now up on youtube. I am not an expert on Robert's Rules, but I am wondering:

1) Could anything have happened previously (before the video begins) that would have made the outcome legitimate. For example, under suspension of rules would this have been allowed?

2) Could anything have been said or done to prevent the close of the meeting or to continue the meeting in a "rump" fashion after the meeting was "adjourned"?

[sailingaway]

I will say that they ignore Roberts' rules when they feel like it (watch the Denver convention spread as us being out of control when THEY were ignoring rules and our guys were yelling 'Point of order' by the HUNDREDS to enforce them....)

Videos are ultimately good. Inviting media. But that doesn't help your rules issue, so I hope those who know will answer that.

[LostNFoundNTx]

Here are my two replies:


At 1:35, the speaker said "I move the slate be accepted." This is a main motion and open for debate, which could then be brought to a close by calling the question with a 2/3 vote. However, the immediately following call for a vote in the video by the chair was out of order, and a point of order could be called, but only before the first vote is cast. If the point of order is ignored, it can be resolved as I described in another thread (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?367045-Robert-s-Rules-of-Order-questions-and-answers&p=4278972&viewfull=1#post4278972) (RONR (11th ed.), pp. 650-651).

The chair does not have to recount the vote if the division is used as a dilatory tactic when the result of a full vote is clear.

At 2:06, an appeal is made on the chair's ruling of the result of the vote. Per RONR (11th ed.), p. 259, ll. 10-15, the chair's judgement on the result of a vote is not a ruling and is not subject to appeal. The correct handling is a Point of Order on the chair's failure to properly handle a non-dilatory division of the vote, which as I mentioned above can be handled if the chair chooses to ignore it.

The other comments made by the members were spoken without privilege and could be ignored.

Due to a lack of a point of order as mentioned above, the chair's judgement on the vote was not overturned by the assembly, so even though it was clear on the video that the chair did not follow the rules regarding debate or division of the vote the final result will stand.


In addition, since the meeting was not properly adjourned, if the remaining members met the quorum, they would have 100% of the vote to declare the chair vacant, replace the chair, and reconsider anything they wanted to.

Assuming quorum was met by the Paul supporters, by running out of the room the chair and other members left the entire slate in complete control of Paul supporters, if they had only known the rules on how to handle the situation.

Under GA GOP rules, there is no quorum for the county convention. lol.