Am I alone in thinking that "Roberts' Rules of Order" are a monumental
waste of time?  At the faculty meeting yesterday, interminable periods
of time were spent in counting the votes ... on calling the question ...
on voting for the amendment ... of the amendment ... of the motion ...

As a "True Brit" I suppose I should be grateful that procedures
developed for the British Parliament should have been refined and
codified as Roberts' Rules, which now dominate almost all meetings in
the USA (but not in Britain)!  However, I do not think they are either
helpful or necessary, and are so Byzantine that a "parliamentarian" is
required to keep everyone on track.  Why bother?

I have discovered that there is no need to use Roberts' Rules, unless
their use has been adopted by the organization as a bylaw.

As an alternative to "Roberts' Rules", I thus offer "Mike's Method",
which I use whenever I chair a committee:

a) If everyone agrees on something, you simply move on to the next item.
b) A motion can be proposed, but is not required to be seconded
c) Discussion follows, until the chair decides it is time to settle the
matter
d) Amendments are not necessary, since exactly what is being proposed is
decided during the discussion
e) If there is general agreement, no vote is needed
f) If there is dissent, an open or secret vote may be taken

It is quicker, and I think no less democratic, than the painful process
under which we are currently suffer!!
--
Michael W. Whittle, M.D., Ph.D.
Cline Chair of Rehabilitation Technology
The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
615 McCallie Ave.
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37403, U.S.A.
Phone: +1-423-755-4046
Fax: +1-423-785-2215
Email: [log in to unmask]