Understanding Robert's Rules, Part 2: Basic principles

If only the decisions we were making were as inspiring as this lovely sunset. Alas, we are probably choosing the color of the new carpet.

In part 1 of this series, I tried to explain a little about why this guy called Robert came up with his rules in the first place, and why we are now using them.

I concluded by suggesting that you don’t have to memorize all the rules in order to make some sense out of them. If you know what the rules are for, you can often work out the details as they arise. At the very least, if you understand the basic principles, the specific applications won’t come as a complete surprise.

The top 2 basic principles (according to me)

First, the majority has the right to make decisions. (This is sometimes abbreviated as “majority rule”.)

Second, the minority has the right to be heard. (This is sometimes abbreviated as “minority rights”.)

Depending on who you ask, there are more basic principles, such as:

• The group has the right to make its own rules.

• You can only do one thing at a time.

• One person speaks at a time.

• All members are equal and have equal rights.

• Only members present can vote.

• Members who are absent also have (some) rights.

But, for simplicity, I think all of these principles can be understood to derive from the first two. For example, the principle that you have to be present to vote protects the right of the minority to be heard, because people who aren’t present can’t hear what is being discussed.

Aside: Being "present" to vote

Anyone who has ever been forced to plan a meeting on Zoom knows that "present" doesn't always have to mean that everyone is literally in the same room. Generally, though, it does mean that everyone needs to be able to participate in the discussion.

Principle 1: The majority makes decisions.

If, like Blossom, you don’t have anything that you need to get done, then why are you having a meeting using parliamentary procedure? Go do something else. Blossom suggests getting ice cream.

The group needs to be able to get things done. Therefore, it should not be unnecessarily difficult to make decisions.

The first and most obvious implication is that most votes, by default, are decided by a simple majority (more than half). This is relatively easy to achieve.

But also, for example, changing the rules generally requires a 2/3 vote (at least 2/3), which is more difficult to achieve. It’s still possible, which is important, because you might need to change the rules in order to get things done. However, constantly changing the rules makes it harder to get things done (it takes up time and can be confusing), so it should not be too easy.

Principle 2: The minority has the right to be heard.

In the process of getting things done, everyone’s voice should be able to be heard.

You can’t have everyone talking forever, though, because then you would not be able to get things done. Therefore, if you want to bring an end to the discussion (stop people from being heard), that should be possible, but more difficult.

One obvious implication of this principle is that generally, any vote that is going to limit or end discussion is going to be decided by a 2/3 vote.

Another example is that every member has the right to propose an action for the group to make a decision about (make a motion). But, if absolutely no one else wants to even talk about that action (second the motion), the group isn’t forced to discuss it.

Practical examples

To illustrate how this works in practice, and to give you a chance to see if you’ve got the ideas down, I now present an account of a recent meeting of the Association for Having Meetings (AFHM). Each example motion has a mini “quiz” to test applying the basic principles to the situation.

You should not need an abacus to understand these examples, which is good, because I don’t know how to use an abacus.

…this might be a good time to point out that not all decisions that you make using Robert’s Rules are necessarily going to be good or sensible decisions. The goal of Robert’s Rules is just to make sure that they are the group’s decisions.

If at any point you stop finding this story hilarious, feel free to skip to the summary at the bottom.

Example 1: A simple (but silly) motion.

After being recognized by the chair, Alice moves to direct the AFHM council to create a task force on task forces. Bob seconds the motion. The motion is now on the floor for discussion! How exciting!

Alice has a chance to speak first, since she made the motion. She explains why a task force task force is totally necessary. No one else wants to speak, so the motion goes to a vote.

Motion: direct the AHFM council to create a task force on task forces

• Simple majority or 2/3 vote?

  This is a simple majority vote, because it’s just a basic decision about a basic action.

• There are 100 total votes. 51 for, and 49 against. What’s the outcome?

  The motion carries, because 51/100 is more than half.

Example 2: Help, we’re stuck in a pointless debate!

After being recognized by the chair, Bob moves to direct the council to commend Alice for her brilliant motion. Carol seconds the motion. Twelve people line up to speak.

After 8 people have spoken (some for, some against) and 9 more people have gotten in line, Dan calls the question.

Aside: The drama of calling the question

Call the question (aka "move the previous question") is a special motion that asks the group to decide whether or not to end discussion and move immediately to a vote. There is no discussion about calling the question, you just have to vote on it. Yes, you’re voting about voting. Yay!

Calling the question is either the best or the worst, depending. Use this power thoughtfully.

Motion: call the question

• Simple majority or 2/3 vote?

  This is a 2/3 vote, because calling the question is voting to end discussion, which has the effect of stopping voices from being heard.

• There are 99 total votes, 66 for and 33 against. What's the outcome?

  The motion carries, because 66/99 is at least 2/3. (In fact, it’s exactly 2/3.)

Motion: direct the council to commend Alice for her brilliant motion

• Simple majority or 2/3 vote?

  This is a simple majority vote, because it’s a basic decision about a basic action.

• There are 94 total votes, 23 for and 71 against. What's the outcome?

  The motion fails, because 23/94 is less than 50%. Sorry, Alice!

Example 3: The power of the second

Edna moves that the whole group stop making silly motions. Nobody seconds the motion, so it is not considered. How shocking! Edna may possibly be regretting her decision to join the AFHM.

Example 4: Amending the (amendment to the) agenda

Carol moves to amend the agenda to include a 2-hour lunch break. Bob seconds.

After some debate, Dan moves to amend the amendment to specify a 3-hour lunch break. Bob seconds. After Dan introduces his amendment, there is no discussion. How uncharacteristic!

Motion: change the main motion from “amend the agenda to include a 2-hour lunch break” to “amend the agenda to include a 3-hour lunch break”.

• Simple majority or 2/3 vote?

  This motion requires a simple majority vote, because it’s just changing a proposed action, not changing an actual rule.

• There are 38 total votes, 32 in favor and 6 opposed. What's the outcome?

  The motion carries, because 32/38 is more than 50%. Wait, weren’t there 100 total votes at the beginning of this meeting?

Back to the main motion! There is some more discussion, which no one wants to hear about.

Motion (as amended): amend the agenda to include a 3-hour lunch break

• Simple majority or 2/3 vote?

  This is a 2/3 vote, because amending the agenda is a form of changing the rules.

• There are 34 total votes, 34 in favor and 0 opposed. Do I even need to ask?

  The motion carries, because 34/34 is at least 2/3. I’m beginning to think the meetings of this group are just an excuse to have lunch.

Example 5: Saved by the orders of the day

Bob calls for the orders of the day. The chair checks the agenda, and discovers that the next order of the day is lunch. Everyone goes to lunch. For two three hours.

Aside: The deep magic of orders of the day

When you are making up the schedule, certain very important items of business may be labeled orders of the day. Those parts are non-negotiable. You can't skip them. You have to do them at the time it says on the schedule.

Normally, you will just do those things when you said you would do them. But, if the meeting gets off-schedule, then any member can call for the orders of the day, and then you must immediately get back on schedule. It's kind of like a magic reset button.

Why is this a thing? Well, it gives you a little wiggle room with your schedule, but it also stops you from getting so far off track that you don’t get the most important things done. (Lunch, for a lot of people, is going to be one of those important things. People get cranky when the are hungry.)

In summary:

The first two principles are that the majority has the right to make decisions, and the minority has the right to be heard. Another way to say this is that you need to get things done, but you also need to hear from your members. These goals can interact in complicated ways, but the basic ideas are enough to get you started.

A simple majority is more than half. A 2/3 vote is at least 2/3. Generally, a simple majority is for decisions that should be relatively easy to make, and a 2/3 vote is for decisions that should be a bit more difficult.

Do not join the Association for Having Meetings. You would only regret it, like poor Edna does.

Everyone has gone to lunch, except me. I’m getting ice cream!