3 ms·

I fully expected this article to discover/declare that Robert was a Bad Person and therefore we must abandon RRoO. My knee-jerk conclusion wasn't far off. Not R

by teilo 7y ago

I fully expected this article to discover/declare that Robert was a Bad Person and therefore we must abandon RRoO. My knee-jerk conclusion wasn't far off. Not Robert, but his heirs are the Bad People. The premise of this article is the problem, not Roberts Rules themselves, regardless of edition: That if person A invented thing B, then no matter how useful thing B may or may not be, it is the character of person A, not the utility of thing B, that determines whether we can use it. Enough of this crap. Enough of outrage farming. Enough of guilt-by-association ad absurdum. RRoO, like any other invention or discovery, stands or falls on its own merits. I've seen RRoO used tyrannically to suppress debate, and I've seen them used wisely. No set of rules is going to perfectly fix contentious interactions or political underhandedness. Even consensus-based alternatives can be and are manipulated.

pkd 7y ago
I don't think there's any guilt by association being assigned to anything. The article in my head amounted to the realization that the corporation behind Robert's Rules does not itself adhere to the book's teachings and has had problematic elements in the past. So instead they recommend other resources, one explicitly still about Robert's Rules itself. >> I’m ready to advocate on my campus against all post-1915 editions (with apologies to Cleary) in part because of her politics and in part because there are plenty of alternatives. My new favorites are Nancy Sylvester’s The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Robert’s Rules, and Alice Sturgis’s The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure The only outrage I felt came from your comment.
GhettoMaestro 7y ago
> I've seen RRoO used tyrannically to suppress debate, and I've seen them used wisely. I had the pleasure of dealing with an eccentric co-founder who would do exactly this. It got interesting when I starting using RRoO procedures to attempt to stop him from derailing the conversation. Eventually he would just over-rule anyone he perceived as blocking his path. Lol it was such a cluster fuck at the end.

by teilo 7y ago

pkd 7y ago

I don't think there's any guilt by association being assigned to anything. The article in my head amounted to the realization that the corporation behind Robert's Rules does not itself adhere to the book's teachings and has had problematic elements in the past. So instead they recommend other resources, one explicitly still about Robert's Rules itself. >> I’m ready to advocate on my campus against all post-1915 editions (with apologies to Cleary) in part because of her politics and in part because there are plenty of alternatives. My new favorites are Nancy Sylvester’s The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Robert’s Rules, and Alice Sturgis’s The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure The only outrage I felt came from your comment.

GhettoMaestro 7y ago

> I've seen RRoO used tyrannically to suppress debate, and I've seen them used wisely. I had the pleasure of dealing with an eccentric co-founder who would do exactly this. It got interesting when I starting using RRoO procedures to attempt to stop him from derailing the conversation. Eventually he would just over-rule anyone he perceived as blocking his path. Lol it was such a cluster fuck at the end.