yes

At 8:39 AM -0700 4/12/00, TVick65536@aol.com submitted the 15th vote: > >Yes. >Tina Vickery Jim, How disrespectful of your fellow Board Members to introduce a motion that passed unanimously within 11 hours. Don't you know it disturbs us all greatly to agree on something? -- Teri ;-) ;-)

After much reflection I want to share my thoughts with the Board and the USGW world, I guess, since this is an open read list. I write this while yawning in disgust. Folks, there just ain't gonna be an agreement between the parties to solve this mess. If Shari's motion is passed it will be ignored by both sides. So what you do you do then? The ACP is a special project of the Archives. The CP was originally THE Archives Census Project. It was pirated away by Kay, the privateer. In the meantime, the ByLaws arose out of the mists to sanction a Census Project. The CP fills that role now because the ACP is an Archives special project. Are you still with me or has everyone yawned in disgust also and fell asleep? Solution? None. But a workaround is possible. Let the CP continued as they are. Let the ACP continue as they are. Here is where the Board should come in. Insure that both projects answer email from transcribers and others in a timely fashion. If they don't answer mail, advertise the fact to the world causing as much embarassment as possible. Each can do transcriptions. The first to receive a message from a transcriber puts that person to work for their respective project and the other stays the hell out of THAT particular transcriber's business so that John Schunk doesn't have to send two CDs. The CP puts up a front page with only their transcriber information including the completed transcriptions, as they do now, and furnishes copies to the Archives, as they do now. The Acp puts up a front page with ALL transcriptions (but only ACP transcribers), including indexes...and etc. If anyone is still with me, read on for awhile longer. To sum up, there is enough work for both to do transcriptions. The Archives must have ALL the information to fulfill their role as the USGW Digital Library. Each has a front page to keep their egos happy. I hope that those in the trenches doing the work for both projects ignore any ego driven leadership from both projects and work together to satisfy the goal of getting the census online. Now I know there is something wrong with this and probably the first to answer will enlighten me. Joe -- Zsedeny Genealogy - http://www.rootsweb.com/~jzed/home.htm NDGenWeb Archives - http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/nd/ndfiles.htm Pembina County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndpembin/pembina.htm Ramsey County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndramsey/ramsey.htm

I Vote Yes Richard... > Board members: > > Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > > This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue > regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > > Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question > Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question > Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way > > 2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the > Question to pass. > > Tim > Richard M. Howland Mailto:RichPump@wf.net ICQ # 898319 NE/NCR CC Representative HOWLAND-L List Co-ordinator WOODWORKING-L list Co-ordinator VARNER-L List Co-ordinator FISHING-L list Co-ordinator ILPIATT-L List Co-ordinator HEDGEHOGS-L List Co-ordinator TXYOUNG-L List Co-ordinator http://www.rootsweb.com/~ilpiatt/piatt.htm http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~richpump/YoungCountyCemPage.htm http://www.pets.rootsweb.com/~hedgehogs/index.html http://www.crafts.rootsweb.com/~woodworking/index.html http://www.wf.net/~richpump/HowlandOnLine.html

Yes Betsy <snip> > >Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > > > >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue > >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > > > >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question <snip>

YES RootsLady (aka) Barbara Yancey Dore > > Board members: > > Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > > This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue > regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > > Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question > Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question > Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way > > 2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the > Question to pass. > > Tim > > > At 06:33 AM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: > >Did our esteemed NC ask for a second? I again call the question and ask > for a > >second myself. > > > >Jim > > > >Tim Stowell wrote: > > > >> At 11:03 AM 4/9/00 -0400, you wrote: > >> >I call the question... > >> >Jim > >> > > >> >Holly Timm wrote: > >> > > >> >> At 06:40 AM 4/9/00 -0500, Ginger wrote: > >> >> >Tim, > >> >> >May I ask why there has been no call to vote for a > >> >> >vote on Motion 00-8? The customary 48 hr discussion > >> >> >period ended some time ago. > >> >> > >> >> I don't know how others feel but the volume of email being received and > >> >> needing to be read and digested and some replied to is to me part of the > >> >> discussion. I am no where near ready to vote and frankly, I am less > >> >> concerned about the opinions of my fellow board members at this point > than > >> >> I am about determining (and at times deciphering) the thoughts, feelings > >> >> and questions of my constituency, all of them, not just those who are > >> >> bombarding the lists and the board members. > >> >> > >> >> Holly > >> > > >> > >> Jim your call dies for lack of a second. > >> > >> Section 16, Page 199 > >> EQUAL APPLICATION OF RULES TO COLLOQUIAL FORMS SUCH AS "CALL FOR THE > >> QUESTION." A motion such as "I call for (or"call") the question" or "I > >> move we vote now" is simply a motion for the Previous Question made in > >> nonstandard form and it is subject to all of the rules in this > >> section. Care should be taken that failure to understand this fact does > >> not lead to violation of members' rights of debate. > >> > >> Sometimes the mere making of a motion for the Previous Question or "call > >> for the question" may motivate unanimous consent to ending debate. Before > >> or after such a motion has been seconded, the chair may ask if there is any > >> objection to closing debate. If member(s) object or try to get the floor, > >> he should ask if there is a second to the motion or call; or, if it has > >> already been seconded, he must immediately take a vote on whether to order > >> the Previous Question. But regardless of the wording of a motion or "call" > >> seeking to close debate, it always requires a second and a two-thirds vote, > >> taken separately from and before the vote(s) on the motions(s) to which it > >> is applied, to shut off debate against the will of even one member who > >> wishes to speak and has not exhausted his right to debate (see pp. 42; > >> 382-384). > >> > >> Page 42 states "A member who has spoken twice on a particular question on > >> the same day has exhausted his right to debate that question for that day". > >> > >> Tim > > > > >

Enough additional time to hear from constituents has now passed... I vote yes on the Call Holly At 09:25 PM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: >Jim, > >Did you not see that the others still wished to keep discussion going - ie >Holly, in the note you answered to? Also Pam asked for more time shortly >thereafter. > >Do you not respect fellow Board members wishes to do so? > >However, be that as it may since you have Called the Question and Virginia >has given it a second - > >Board members: > >Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question >Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question >Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way > >2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the >Question to pass. > >Tim > > >At 06:33 AM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: > >Did our esteemed NC ask for a second? I again call the question and ask >for a > >second myself. > > > >Jim > > > >Tim Stowell wrote: > > > >> At 11:03 AM 4/9/00 -0400, you wrote: > >> >I call the question... > >> >Jim > >> > > >> >Holly Timm wrote: > >> > > >> >> At 06:40 AM 4/9/00 -0500, Ginger wrote: > >> >> >Tim, > >> >> >May I ask why there has been no call to vote for a > >> >> >vote on Motion 00-8? The customary 48 hr discussion > >> >> >period ended some time ago. > >> >> > >> >> I don't know how others feel but the volume of email being received and > >> >> needing to be read and digested and some replied to is to me part > of the > >> >> discussion. I am no where near ready to vote and frankly, I am less > >> >> concerned about the opinions of my fellow board members at this point >than > >> >> I am about determining (and at times deciphering) the thoughts, > feelings > >> >> and questions of my constituency, all of them, not just those who are > >> >> bombarding the lists and the board members. > >> >> > >> >> Holly > >> > > >> > >> Jim your call dies for lack of a second. > >> > >> Section 16, Page 199 > >> EQUAL APPLICATION OF RULES TO COLLOQUIAL FORMS SUCH AS "CALL FOR THE > >> QUESTION." A motion such as "I call for (or"call") the question" or "I > >> move we vote now" is simply a motion for the Previous Question made in > >> nonstandard form and it is subject to all of the rules in this > >> section. Care should be taken that failure to understand this fact does > >> not lead to violation of members' rights of debate. > >> > >> Sometimes the mere making of a motion for the Previous Question or "call > >> for the question" may motivate unanimous consent to ending debate. Before > >> or after such a motion has been seconded, the chair may ask if there > is any > >> objection to closing debate. If member(s) object or try to get the floor, > >> he should ask if there is a second to the motion or call; or, if it has > >> already been seconded, he must immediately take a vote on whether to order > >> the Previous Question. But regardless of the wording of a motion or > "call" > >> seeking to close debate, it always requires a second and a two-thirds > vote, > >> taken separately from and before the vote(s) on the motions(s) to which it > >> is applied, to shut off debate against the will of even one member who > >> wishes to speak and has not exhausted his right to debate (see pp. 42; > >> 382-384). > >> > >> Page 42 states "A member who has spoken twice on a particular question on > >> the same day has exhausted his right to debate that question for that > day". > >> > >> Tim > > > >

YES! Gloria >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in >question -- Southwest/South Central CC Representative, USGenWeb Advisory Board Personal page http://www.angelfire.com/tx2/gmayfield/index.html TX Tombstone Project Manager http://www.rootsweb.com/~cemetery/Texas/ Texas Surnames http://www.rootsweb.com/~txrusk/txsurnames.html Panola County TX USGenWeb http://www.rootsweb.com/~txpanola/ Rusk County TX USGenWeb http://www.rootsweb.com/~txrusk/index.htm

In a message dated 00-04-12 09:12:47 EDT, you write: Yes. Tina Vickery

YES Jim (Just in case the other one wasn't counted)

Yes Maggie <snip> > >Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > > > >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue > >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > > > >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question <snip>

> Virginia had > previously asked for more time which she has of course now repealed by > voting Yes. I have not asked for more time. You are mistaken. Virginia (Ginger) Cisewski "It takes two to speak the truth: one to talk, another to hear." ----Henry David Thoreau

Yes Shari Handley shari@armada.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> To: <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 9:25 PM Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] call the question : Jim, : : Did you not see that the others still wished to keep discussion going - ie : Holly, in the note you answered to? Also Pam asked for more time shortly : thereafter. : : Do you not respect fellow Board members wishes to do so? : : However, be that as it may since you have Called the Question and Virginia : has given it a second - : : Board members: : : Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. : : This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue : regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. : : Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question : Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question : Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way : : 2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the : Question to pass. : : Tim : : : At 06:33 AM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: : >Did our esteemed NC ask for a second? I again call the question and ask : for a : >second myself. : > : >Jim : > : >Tim Stowell wrote: : > : >> At 11:03 AM 4/9/00 -0400, you wrote: : >> >I call the question... : >> >Jim : >> > : >> >Holly Timm wrote: : >> > : >> >> At 06:40 AM 4/9/00 -0500, Ginger wrote: : >> >> >Tim, : >> >> >May I ask why there has been no call to vote for a : >> >> >vote on Motion 00-8? The customary 48 hr discussion : >> >> >period ended some time ago. : >> >> : >> >> I don't know how others feel but the volume of email being received and : >> >> needing to be read and digested and some replied to is to me part of the : >> >> discussion. I am no where near ready to vote and frankly, I am less : >> >> concerned about the opinions of my fellow board members at this point : than : >> >> I am about determining (and at times deciphering) the thoughts, feelings : >> >> and questions of my constituency, all of them, not just those who are : >> >> bombarding the lists and the board members. : >> >> : >> >> Holly : >> > : >> : >> Jim your call dies for lack of a second. : >> : >> Section 16, Page 199 : >> EQUAL APPLICATION OF RULES TO COLLOQUIAL FORMS SUCH AS "CALL FOR THE : >> QUESTION." A motion such as "I call for (or"call") the question" or "I : >> move we vote now" is simply a motion for the Previous Question made in : >> nonstandard form and it is subject to all of the rules in this : >> section. Care should be taken that failure to understand this fact does : >> not lead to violation of members' rights of debate. : >> : >> Sometimes the mere making of a motion for the Previous Question or "call : >> for the question" may motivate unanimous consent to ending debate. Before : >> or after such a motion has been seconded, the chair may ask if there is any : >> objection to closing debate. If member(s) object or try to get the floor, : >> he should ask if there is a second to the motion or call; or, if it has : >> already been seconded, he must immediately take a vote on whether to order : >> the Previous Question. But regardless of the wording of a motion or "call" : >> seeking to close debate, it always requires a second and a two-thirds vote, : >> taken separately from and before the vote(s) on the motions(s) to which it : >> is applied, to shut off debate against the will of even one member who : >> wishes to speak and has not exhausted his right to debate (see pp. 42; : >> 382-384). : >> : >> Page 42 states "A member who has spoken twice on a particular question on : >> the same day has exhausted his right to debate that question for that day". : >> : >> Tim : > : > :

Then I stand corrected. Holly asked for further time, Virginia had previously asked for more time which she has of course now repealed by voting Yes. Tim At 12:23 AM 4/12/00 -0400, you wrote: >Ginger is right. I did not ask for more time on the vote on Motion >00-8. I said we HAD to VOTE soon, seat a Census Rep and then move on to >the discussion of Motion 00-6. That one is the BIGGIE! >Pam > >Ginger wrote: >> >> Tim, >> >> Your comments are uncalled for. In light of your recent >> actions maybe you should review the role of a Chair >> in a meeting. Your comments about respect for board >> member are like the pot calling the kettle black, since >> your recent actions clearly demonstrate that you have >> no respect for this board or it's function. >> >> BTW: Maybe you should read Pam's note again. >> >> Ginger >> gingerh@shawneelink.com >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> >> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> >> Date: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 8:53 PM >> Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] call the question >> >> >Jim, >> > >> >Did you not see that the others still wished to keep discussion going - ie >> >Holly, in the note you answered to? Also Pam asked for more time shortly >> >thereafter. >> > >> >Do you not respect fellow Board members wishes to do so? >> > >> >However, be that as it may since you have Called the Question and Virginia >> >has given it a second - >> > >> >Board members: >> > >> >Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. >> > >> >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue >> >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. >> > >> >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question >> >Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question >> >Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way >> > >> >2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the >> >Question to pass. >> > >> >Tim >> > >> > >> >At 06:33 AM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: >> >>Did our esteemed NC ask for a second? I again call the question and ask >> >for a >> >>second myself. >> >> >> >>Jim >> >> >> >>Tim Stowell wrote: >> >> >> >>> At 11:03 AM 4/9/00 -0400, you wrote: >> >>> >I call the question... >> >>> >Jim >> >>> > >> >>> >Holly Timm wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> At 06:40 AM 4/9/00 -0500, Ginger wrote: >> >>> >> >Tim, >> >>> >> >May I ask why there has been no call to vote for a >> >>> >> >vote on Motion 00-8? The customary 48 hr discussion >> >>> >> >period ended some time ago. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> I don't know how others feel but the volume of email being received and >> >>> >> needing to be read and digested and some replied to is to me part of the >> >>> >> discussion. I am no where near ready to vote and frankly, I am less >> >>> >> concerned about the opinions of my fellow board members at this point >> >than >> >>> >> I am about determining (and at times deciphering) the thoughts, feelings >> >>> >> and questions of my constituency, all of them, not just those who are >> >>> >> bombarding the lists and the board members. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Holly >> >>> > >> >>> >> >>> Jim your call dies for lack of a second. >> >>> >> >>> Section 16, Page 199 >> >>> EQUAL APPLICATION OF RULES TO COLLOQUIAL FORMS SUCH AS "CALL FOR THE >> >>> QUESTION." A motion such as "I call for (or"call") the question" or "I >> >>> move we vote now" is simply a motion for the Previous Question made in >> >>> nonstandard form and it is subject to all of the rules in this >> >>> section. Care should be taken that failure to understand this fact does >> >>> not lead to violation of members' rights of debate. >> >>> >> >>> Sometimes the mere making of a motion for the Previous Question or "call >> >>> for the question" may motivate unanimous consent to ending debate. Before >> >>> or after such a motion has been seconded, the chair may ask if there is any >> >>> objection to closing debate. If member(s) object or try to get the floor, >> >>> he should ask if there is a second to the motion or call; or, if it has >> >>> already been seconded, he must immediately take a vote on whether to order >> >>> the Previous Question. But regardless of the wording of a motion or "call" >> >>> seeking to close debate, it always requires a second and a two-thirds vote, >> >>> taken separately from and before the vote(s) on the motions(s) to which it >> >>> is applied, to shut off debate against the will of even one member who >> >>> wishes to speak and has not exhausted his right to debate (see pp. 42; >> >>> 382-384). >> >>> >> >>> Page 42 states "A member who has spoken twice on a particular question on >> >>> the same day has exhausted his right to debate that question for that day". >> >>> >> >>> Tim >> >> >> >> >> > > >

Yes. Teri Pettit wrote: > > >Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > > > >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue > >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > > > >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question > > Yes.

Ginger is right. I did not ask for more time on the vote on Motion 00-8. I said we HAD to VOTE soon, seat a Census Rep and then move on to the discussion of Motion 00-6. That one is the BIGGIE! Pam Ginger wrote: > > Tim, > > Your comments are uncalled for. In light of your recent > actions maybe you should review the role of a Chair > in a meeting. Your comments about respect for board > member are like the pot calling the kettle black, since > your recent actions clearly demonstrate that you have > no respect for this board or it's function. > > BTW: Maybe you should read Pam's note again. > > Ginger > gingerh@shawneelink.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> > To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> > Date: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 8:53 PM > Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] call the question > > >Jim, > > > >Did you not see that the others still wished to keep discussion going - ie > >Holly, in the note you answered to? Also Pam asked for more time shortly > >thereafter. > > > >Do you not respect fellow Board members wishes to do so? > > > >However, be that as it may since you have Called the Question and Virginia > >has given it a second - > > > >Board members: > > > >Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > > > >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue > >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > > > >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question > >Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question > >Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way > > > >2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the > >Question to pass. > > > >Tim > > > > > >At 06:33 AM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: > >>Did our esteemed NC ask for a second? I again call the question and ask > >for a > >>second myself. > >> > >>Jim > >> > >>Tim Stowell wrote: > >> > >>> At 11:03 AM 4/9/00 -0400, you wrote: > >>> >I call the question... > >>> >Jim > >>> > > >>> >Holly Timm wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> At 06:40 AM 4/9/00 -0500, Ginger wrote: > >>> >> >Tim, > >>> >> >May I ask why there has been no call to vote for a > >>> >> >vote on Motion 00-8? The customary 48 hr discussion > >>> >> >period ended some time ago. > >>> >> > >>> >> I don't know how others feel but the volume of email being received and > >>> >> needing to be read and digested and some replied to is to me part of the > >>> >> discussion. I am no where near ready to vote and frankly, I am less > >>> >> concerned about the opinions of my fellow board members at this point > >than > >>> >> I am about determining (and at times deciphering) the thoughts, feelings > >>> >> and questions of my constituency, all of them, not just those who are > >>> >> bombarding the lists and the board members. > >>> >> > >>> >> Holly > >>> > > >>> > >>> Jim your call dies for lack of a second. > >>> > >>> Section 16, Page 199 > >>> EQUAL APPLICATION OF RULES TO COLLOQUIAL FORMS SUCH AS "CALL FOR THE > >>> QUESTION." A motion such as "I call for (or"call") the question" or "I > >>> move we vote now" is simply a motion for the Previous Question made in > >>> nonstandard form and it is subject to all of the rules in this > >>> section. Care should be taken that failure to understand this fact does > >>> not lead to violation of members' rights of debate. > >>> > >>> Sometimes the mere making of a motion for the Previous Question or "call > >>> for the question" may motivate unanimous consent to ending debate. Before > >>> or after such a motion has been seconded, the chair may ask if there is any > >>> objection to closing debate. If member(s) object or try to get the floor, > >>> he should ask if there is a second to the motion or call; or, if it has > >>> already been seconded, he must immediately take a vote on whether to order > >>> the Previous Question. But regardless of the wording of a motion or "call" > >>> seeking to close debate, it always requires a second and a two-thirds vote, > >>> taken separately from and before the vote(s) on the motions(s) to which it > >>> is applied, to shut off debate against the will of even one member who > >>> wishes to speak and has not exhausted his right to debate (see pp. 42; > >>> 382-384). > >>> > >>> Page 42 states "A member who has spoken twice on a particular question on > >>> the same day has exhausted his right to debate that question for that day". > >>> > >>> Tim > >> > >> > >

Yes Joe Tim Stowell wrote: > > Jim, > > Did you not see that the others still wished to keep discussion going - ie > Holly, in the note you answered to? Also Pam asked for more time shortly > thereafter. > > Do you not respect fellow Board members wishes to do so? > > However, be that as it may since you have Called the Question and Virginia > has given it a second - > > Board members: > > Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > > This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue > regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > > Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question > Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question > Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way > > 2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the > Question to pass. > > Tim > > At 06:33 AM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: > >Did our esteemed NC ask for a second? I again call the question and ask > for a > >second myself. > > > >Jim > > > >Tim Stowell wrote: > > > >> At 11:03 AM 4/9/00 -0400, you wrote: > >> >I call the question... > >> >Jim > >> > > >> >Holly Timm wrote: > >> > > >> >> At 06:40 AM 4/9/00 -0500, Ginger wrote: > >> >> >Tim, > >> >> >May I ask why there has been no call to vote for a > >> >> >vote on Motion 00-8? The customary 48 hr discussion > >> >> >period ended some time ago. > >> >> > >> >> I don't know how others feel but the volume of email being received and > >> >> needing to be read and digested and some replied to is to me part of the > >> >> discussion. I am no where near ready to vote and frankly, I am less > >> >> concerned about the opinions of my fellow board members at this point > than > >> >> I am about determining (and at times deciphering) the thoughts, feelings > >> >> and questions of my constituency, all of them, not just those who are > >> >> bombarding the lists and the board members. > >> >> > >> >> Holly > >> > > >> > >> Jim your call dies for lack of a second. > >> > >> Section 16, Page 199 > >> EQUAL APPLICATION OF RULES TO COLLOQUIAL FORMS SUCH AS "CALL FOR THE > >> QUESTION." A motion such as "I call for (or"call") the question" or "I > >> move we vote now" is simply a motion for the Previous Question made in > >> nonstandard form and it is subject to all of the rules in this > >> section. Care should be taken that failure to understand this fact does > >> not lead to violation of members' rights of debate. > >> > >> Sometimes the mere making of a motion for the Previous Question or "call > >> for the question" may motivate unanimous consent to ending debate. Before > >> or after such a motion has been seconded, the chair may ask if there is any > >> objection to closing debate. If member(s) object or try to get the floor, > >> he should ask if there is a second to the motion or call; or, if it has > >> already been seconded, he must immediately take a vote on whether to order > >> the Previous Question. But regardless of the wording of a motion or "call" > >> seeking to close debate, it always requires a second and a two-thirds vote, > >> taken separately from and before the vote(s) on the motions(s) to which it > >> is applied, to shut off debate against the will of even one member who > >> wishes to speak and has not exhausted his right to debate (see pp. 42; > >> 382-384). > >> > >> Page 42 states "A member who has spoken twice on a particular question on > >> the same day has exhausted his right to debate that question for that day". > >> > >> Tim > > > > -- Zsedeny Genealogy - http://www.rootsweb.com/~jzed/home.htm NDGenWeb Archives - http://www.rootsweb.com/~usgenweb/nd/ndfiles.htm Pembina County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndpembin/pembina.htm Ramsey County, ND - http://www.rootsweb.com/~ndramsey/ramsey.htm

Jim, Sorry but you are the one who 'Called the Motion' and according to RRO it must be voted upon and 2/3 vote is required for the discussion to cease and the Motion to be voted upon. You can't have it both ways - either you go by RRO or you don't. Also as has been asked previously by myself AND fellow Board members - votes to be counted are to be free of comment. In other words just say YES, NO or ABSTAIN when you vote. If you wish to comment, please send it in a seperate note. Tim At 10:20 PM 4/11/00 -0400, Jim Powell Jr wrote: >Tim, >This is becoming absurd. Why not just let us vote? Either the cavalry has >arrived or they are not coming. I did read those messages, did you? Only the >first one said we needed more discussion on this particular Motion. > >I vote **YES** to cease discussion on this motion and actually vote on the >question on the floor before we forget what that motion was. The discussion and >postings to this list haven't kept that motion in mind. > >Just in case the unwanted commentary clouded my vote, it is >****YES**** > >Tim Wrote: >"Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question" > >Jim Powell Jr > > > >Tim Stowell wrote: > >> Jim, >> >> Did you not see that the others still wished to keep discussion going - ie >> Holly, in the note you answered to? Also Pam asked for more time shortly >> thereafter. >> >> Do you not respect fellow Board members wishes to do so? >> >> However, be that as it may since you have Called the Question and Virginia >> has given it a second - >> >> Board members: >> >> Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. >> >> This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue >> regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. >> >> Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question >> Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question >> Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way >> >> 2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the >> Question to pass. >> >> Tim

>Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question Yes.

YES! And just so my vote isn't misinterpreted: >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in >question Ginger gingerh@shawneelink.com -----Original Message----- From: Tim Stowell <tstowell@chattanooga.net> To: BOARD-L@rootsweb.com <BOARD-L@rootsweb.com> Date: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 8:53 PM Subject: Re: [BOARD-L] call the question >Jim, > >Did you not see that the others still wished to keep discussion going - ie >Holly, in the note you answered to? Also Pam asked for more time shortly >thereafter. > >Do you not respect fellow Board members wishes to do so? > >However, be that as it may since you have Called the Question and Virginia >has given it a second - > >Board members: > >Please vote Yes, No, or Abstain - to the Call the Question request. > >This vote is only to determine whether or not discussion shall continue >regarding Motion 00-8, it is NOT a vote on Motion 00-8. > >Voting YES means that you wish discussion to cease on the Motion in question >Voting NO means that you wish discussion to continue on the Motion in question >Voting Abstain means that you don't care either way > >2/3 of members voting after the quorum is reached required for the Call the >Question to pass. > >Tim > > >At 06:33 AM 4/11/00 -0400, you wrote: >>Did our esteemed NC ask for a second? I again call the question and ask >for a >>second myself. >> >>Jim >> >>Tim Stowell wrote: >> >>> At 11:03 AM 4/9/00 -0400, you wrote: >>> >I call the question... >>> >Jim >>> > >>> >Holly Timm wrote: >>> > >>> >> At 06:40 AM 4/9/00 -0500, Ginger wrote: >>> >> >Tim, >>> >> >May I ask why there has been no call to vote for a >>> >> >vote on Motion 00-8? The customary 48 hr discussion >>> >> >period ended some time ago. >>> >> >>> >> I don't know how others feel but the volume of email being received and >>> >> needing to be read and digested and some replied to is to me part of the >>> >> discussion. I am no where near ready to vote and frankly, I am less >>> >> concerned about the opinions of my fellow board members at this point >than >>> >> I am about determining (and at times deciphering) the thoughts, feelings >>> >> and questions of my constituency, all of them, not just those who are >>> >> bombarding the lists and the board members. >>> >> >>> >> Holly >>> > >>> >>> Jim your call dies for lack of a second. >>> >>> Section 16, Page 199 >>> EQUAL APPLICATION OF RULES TO COLLOQUIAL FORMS SUCH AS "CALL FOR THE >>> QUESTION." A motion such as "I call for (or"call") the question" or "I >>> move we vote now" is simply a motion for the Previous Question made in >>> nonstandard form and it is subject to all of the rules in this >>> section. Care should be taken that failure to understand this fact does >>> not lead to violation of members' rights of debate. >>> >>> Sometimes the mere making of a motion for the Previous Question or "call >>> for the question" may motivate unanimous consent to ending debate. Before >>> or after such a motion has been seconded, the chair may ask if there is any >>> objection to closing debate. If member(s) object or try to get the floor, >>> he should ask if there is a second to the motion or call; or, if it has >>> already been seconded, he must immediately take a vote on whether to order >>> the Previous Question. But regardless of the wording of a motion or "call" >>> seeking to close debate, it always requires a second and a two-thirds vote, >>> taken separately from and before the vote(s) on the motions(s) to which it >>> is applied, to shut off debate against the will of even one member who >>> wishes to speak and has not exhausted his right to debate (see pp. 42; >>> 382-384). >>> >>> Page 42 states "A member who has spoken twice on a particular question on >>> the same day has exhausted his right to debate that question for that day". >>> >>> Tim >> >> >