Re: [council] Council procedures

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

In my personal view, a wiki is a work sheet where council can  
contribute whatever they like.   Likewise for the motions wiki, i see  
it as a place where we can work out the language and hopefully come to  
something we agree on.
But yes, only the motions that are made and seconded get voted on.   
What I have hoped would happen is that people would discuss the  
motions and their issues with them on the list so that following  
practices of openness and discussion we could arrive at agreed  
language by the time we had the meeting.  Unfortunately we have less  
substantive discussion between calls then I hope for.
For substantive motion to be voted on it needs to be available for at  
least a week before the meeting.  Are you indicating that a motion  
should made and seconded at least a week before the meeting in  
addition to the proposed text being made available?  If this is a  
practice that has the consensus of the council I am sure we could try  
to follow it.  Council practice to date has been somewhat informal but  
been determined by practice and consensus, and certainly not following  
the procedures of formal rules of order.  I do not think that having a  
motion seconded at a meeting is a detriment to credibility as I  
believe this is a very common practice in voting organizations.  Of  
course as the procedures develop for the bicameral largely non voting  
council in the later half of 2009, things may work very differently.
Another type of motion that I have included in the wiki are the  
procedurals one - these are generally the only motions I make, i.e.  
those that are required by the bylaws etc., I will endeavor to get  
seconders for them as early as possible.  Though often the seconder  
comes out of the language negotiation phase we have in the meetings.   
Again it would be better for this to occur on the list before hand,  
but it mostly doesn't.  If we want to get anything done, we need to do  
it when we can.
a.



On 7 Jan 2009, at 08:32, Philip Sheppard wrote:

> To make all our lives simpler and in particular to make constituency  
> consultation practical, could we desist from the recent practice of  
> posting multiple contradictory motions on the same topic before a  
> meeting ?It is less than helpful to have motions that have not even  
> been seconded placed on the wiki and then discussed at a meeting.   
> This is especially true when the same proposer has posted other  
> motions on the same topic !
> If a motion has any merit, then it should have found at least one  
> other poor soul on Council to support it before it makes an agenda.  
> To seek a seconder at the meeting itself, detracts from our  
> credibility as a decision making body. Too often a motion seems to  
> have been seconded at the last moment more on the grounds of "I like  
> so and so and thus I will be nice and support their motion", rather  
> than based on a rational view of the content of the motion itself as  
> discussed with constituents.
>
> Focus, efficiency, progress,  - let these be our resolutions for 2009.
> Philip