Originally Posted by
Doc Savage
I urge Talkboard not to adopt this practice.
If a motion is poorly drafted in the first place, ostensibly requiring revisions on the fly, then not enough thought and discussion had gone into drafting the motion in the first place, and that argues that a longer period of thoughtful discussion should ensue, not an abbreviated one that could lead to unforeseen consequences.
In addition, this seems to introduce a new way of proponents tweaking motions that seem destined not to pass in order to wear down opposition with specially tailored changes.
The rules regarding discussion periods are there for a reason. No motion is so urgent that it is imperative to pass it hastily.
YMMV.
Cheers,
Doc
^^^ I agree completely! If TB puts forth a motion and a second, the onus is on TB to get it right and not to change the playing field after the fact. If TB screws up by putting forth a poorly worded motion, simply vote it down and then put forth a better/properly worded motion as changing the playing field on the fly imo, is not the way to do it