>Please vote on Motion 00-29A as follows by sending along >your vote equivalent of yes, no, abstain. Thanks, Tim Tim, This calling for a vote without first having any discussion period is what I meant by saying that I didn't think we always needed to stick to the exact letter of parliamentary procedure. I'm not objecting to your doing so; I think there are good reasons to want to move this along even though it is not according to PP. I'm just saying that it wasn't very fair for you to allude to my wanting to use parliamentary procedure "only when it was convenient for those with the most votes", when it should have been clear from my words that I was referring to exactly this kind of informality for the sake of avoiding unecessary delays, which you have been by far the most frequent utilizer of (if not an explicit advocate.) Me: >>But I'm more concerned with pragmatics and getting something >>accomplished than sticking to the exact letter of parliamentary >>procedure, so I personally am OK with ... the changes being >>discussed and made while the motion is supposedly "off the floor" >>(the improper way, but it seems to be what Tim is requesting, >>so if it works, why not?) Tim: >Ok, message to follow. So you are saying to heck with parliamentary >procedure IF it goes against the way you feel things should go?