Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Community > TalkBoard Topics
Reload this Page >

Formalizing a Minor Amendment Process (retry)

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Formalizing a Minor Amendment Process (retry)

 
Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 19, 2015 | 11:48 pm
  #1  
nsx
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Community Builder
Conversation Starter
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,855
Formalizing a Minor Amendment Process (retry)

TalkBoard continues to need to deal with minor amendments despite members' best efforts. Here's a slightly modified version of the proposal which failed 5-3 last time. If there's a way to improve this version I'd like to know that quickly so we can potentially conduct the vote at the same time as the other vote which is starting.


The TalkBoard Guidelines shall be revised as follows:

Add item 4.B.v.
v. Any TalkBoard member may propose a minor amendment to a motion by posting the text in the private TalkBoard forum and in the public TalkBoard Topics forum more than 48 hours from the vote closing time and before enough yes or no votes have been cast to assure passage or failure of the motion. If the originator of a motion, the seconder, and all Yes voters as of the time the amendment was proposed agree that the amendment is both minor and desirable, the TalkBoard President shall revise the motion and ensure that public notices of the motion are also updated. For the purpose of this paragraph, a minor amendment is a change which does not alter the overall intent of the motion nor raise any new issues for consideration which would otherwise warrant the submission of a new motion.

Modify item 4.C.v.
v. Once a TalkBoard member registers a selection that selection is final, except that a member voting No or Abstain may change that vote within 48 hours after a motion has been modified by minor amendment. The TalkBoard President shall manually adjust the original vote count as necessary. If the possibility of changed votes exists due to a proposed minor amendment, the TalkBoard President shall decide whether to defer public announcement of a "shall not pass" outcome until the end of the 48-hour period after the motion is modified.

Add item 4.D.v. and move current item 4.D.v. to become 4.D.vi.
v. When a minor amendment is approved, the TalkBoard President shall instruct the TalkBoard Vice President/Secretary to post the text of the change and a list of the approving TalkBoard members in the public TalkBoard Topics thread announcing the vote.

vi. Once voting is completed and the TalkBoard President has formally announced the results of the vote in the TalkBoard forum the Vice President/Secretary shall announce the full results of the roll call vote in
a. the public TalkBoard Topics thread announcing the vote
b. a new thread in the Town Hall forum.
nsx is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 8:03 am
  #2  
nsx
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Community Builder
Conversation Starter
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,855
Revision to clarify how and when amendments will be presented and approved:

The TalkBoard Guidelines shall be revised as follows:

Add item 4.B.v.
v. Any TalkBoard member may propose a minor amendment to a motion by posting the text in the voting thread in the private TalkBoard forum and in the public TalkBoard Topics forum more than 48 hours from the vote closing time and before enough yes or no votes have been cast to assure passage or failure of the motion. If the originator of a motion, the seconder, and all Yes voters as of the time the amendment was proposed post in the voting thread their agreement that the amendment is both minor and desirable, and if this occurs at least 48 hours from the vote closing time, the TalkBoard President shall revise the motion and ensure that public notices of the motion are also updated. For the purpose of this paragraph, a minor amendment is a change which does not alter the overall intent of the motion nor raise any new issues for consideration which would otherwise warrant the submission of a new motion.

Modify item 4.C.v.
v. Once a TalkBoard member registers a selection that selection is final, except that a member voting No or Abstain may change that vote within 48 hours after a motion has been modified by minor amendment. The TalkBoard President shall manually adjust the original vote count as necessary. If the possibility of changed votes exists due to a proposed minor amendment, the TalkBoard President shall decide whether to defer public announcement of a "shall not pass" outcome.

Add item 4.D.v. and move current item 4.D.v. to become 4.D.vi.
v. When a minor amendment is approved, the TalkBoard President shall instruct the TalkBoard Vice President/Secretary to post the text of the change and a list of the approving TalkBoard members in the public TalkBoard Topics thread announcing the vote.

vi. Once voting is completed and the TalkBoard President has formally announced the results of the vote in the TalkBoard forum the Vice President/Secretary shall announce the full results of the roll call vote in
a. the public TalkBoard Topics thread announcing the vote
b. a new thread in the Town Hall forum.
nsx is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 9:33 am
  #3  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
20 Countries Visited
3M
Conversation Starter
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 42,577
Why don't the TB supporters of this call it what it is; i.e., a "technical amendment" process. "Formalizing a Friendly Amendment Process" sounds like a kumbaya procedure amongst the TB, which is not accurate. The amendments are neither friendly nor hostile. They should only be technical (to clarify a drafting error or correct an impracticality in execution, etc.).
Eastbay1K is online now  
Old May 20, 2015 | 9:43 am
  #4  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
40 Countries Visited
60 Nights
5M
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 102,617
The term "friendly amendment" is used by some groups that do real live meetings. It applies to a proposal to amend a motion that has been moved and seconded, where typically the mover and seconder must approve the amendment. Presumably something that doesn't constitute a modification preserving the intent of the motion would be considered to be out of order. Usually this must be done during the discussion of the motion and before the question has been called to force a vote on the original motion.
MSPeconomist is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 10:27 am
  #5  
nsx
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Community Builder
Conversation Starter
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,855
Originally Posted by Eastbay1K
Why don't the TB supporters of this call it what it is; i.e., a "technical amendment" process.
You're right. I mistitled the thread. The motion refers only to "minor amendment".
nsx is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 10:30 am
  #6  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
1M
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,077
So now we have a second attempt to do something which afaic is not needed as if TB members did their job properly and carefully (n.b. properly and carefully) a good/properly worded motion would not need a "friendly amendment". TB should take the time to hear the public and private comments and get it right as opposed to fixing a mistake that should have been thought about in the first place. I'd rather have a motion voted down or withdrawn if it has "issues", re-worded and put forth again in a better form as opposed to saying "oopsie", we made a mistake and don't want to look bad. Take the time (n.b. take the time) and do it right!
goalie is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 11:11 am
  #7  
nsx
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Community Builder
Conversation Starter
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,855
Originally Posted by goalie
So now we have a second attempt to do something which afaic is not needed as if TB members did their job properly and carefully (n.b. properly and carefully) a good/properly worded motion would not need a "friendly amendment".
And we shouldn't have seat belts in cars either, since we just ought to do a better job of driving.

I am bowing to a reality that I know from years on TalkBoard.
nsx is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 2:36 pm
  #8  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
1M
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,077
Originally Posted by nsx
And we shouldn't have seat belts in cars either, since we just ought to do a better job of driving.

I am bowing to a reality that I know from years on TalkBoard.
What pray tell does that have to do with wording a motion properly and getting it right BEFORE putting it out for public comment? Unless you're saying "I'm sorry for rear-ending you-I see you got hurt because you were not wearing your seatbelt but if you put on your seatbelt, it's all good?"
goalie is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 3:18 pm
  #9  
Moderator: Hilton Honors forums
1M
50 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Marietta, Georgia, United States
Posts: 25,433
The most recent error was committed by me...
Originally Posted by Canarsie
That is a typographical error on my part.

Thank you for catching it, lo2e. Please accept my apologies.

I have revised the motion in the private TalkBoard forum.
...and I take full responsibility for it no excuses.
Canarsie is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 7:41 pm
  #10  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
20 Countries Visited
All eyes on you!
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 52,788
Originally Posted by nsx
And we shouldn't have seat belts in cars either, since we just ought to do a better job of driving.

I am bowing to a reality that I know from years on TalkBoard.
If TB is going to draft motions in the private forum, then they really should be read, reviewed, and if necessary, revised before they are officially motioned and seconded.
kipper is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 7:55 pm
  #11  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
10 Countries Visited
1M
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,077
Originally Posted by kipper
If TB is going to draft motions in the private forum, then they really should be read, reviewed, and if necessary, revised before they are officially motioned and seconded.
This ^
goalie is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 11:07 pm
  #12  
Moderator: Hyatt Gold Passport & Star Alliance
40 Countries Visited
5M
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 1998
Location: London, UK
Programs: UA-1K 3MM/HY- LT Globalist/BA-GGLfL
Posts: 12,761
The President of Talkboard seems to feel he has the power to make minor changes to motions anyway. Is this needed at all?
Markie is offline  
Old May 20, 2015 | 11:56 pm
  #13  
nsx
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Community Builder
Conversation Starter
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,855
Originally Posted by Markie
The President of Talkboard seems to feel he has the power to make minor changes to motions anyway. Is this needed at all?
Arguably not needed, but nice to have. Just like you can use duct tape instead of a seat belt, but the seat belt is so much easier and works better.
nsx is offline  
Old May 21, 2015 | 12:54 pm
  #14  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
20 Countries Visited
3M
Conversation Starter
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 74,109
Originally Posted by Canarsie
The most recent error was committed by me......and I take full responsibility for it no excuses.
Common sense says things like typos shouldn't need an amendment process but should just be corrected if it's something as simple as a typo.

Cheers.
SkiAdcock is offline  
Old May 22, 2015 | 5:47 am
  #15  
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: LHR- ish
Programs: MUCCI, BA Blue
Posts: 4,295
Originally Posted by Markie
The President of Talkboard seems to feel he has the power to make minor changes to motions anyway. Is this needed at all?
I don't see why the TB president shouldn't make minor changes that do not affect the intention of the motion - such as fixing typos - besides if anyone thinks the TB President as abusing their position they can complain to the Community Director.

Personally I can't really see the point of this. Common sense dictates that typos need to be fixed and that fixing them doesn't change the motion. And if a motion is badly written/wrong it should be withdrawn or voted down. Maybe what is needed is a way of rejecting motions which haven't been properly written?
exilencfc is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.