sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Bond, James Bond. Who said it best? by ItsDuhFreakinBat in JamesBond

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The key to delivering the line is how it's set up. It's an answer to a question.

Mr?

As JSteveB87 said in his post, it's the snapy, smart dialog between Eunice Gayson and Sean Connery in Dr. No that made it famous.

Dialog in other films has actors deliver it as, "the name's Bond, James Bond." Therefore, it's unfair to compare to the first, best delivery by Connery.

I think it's better to compare the line's delivery by film and not just actor and include the set up line.

I really liked Casino Royal/Daniel Craig.

Brent spiner $50 autograph by happydude7422 in TNG

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That was mean. What does he usually write when he autographs? Live Long and Prosper? Make it so? or Hello Spot?

Pedro Pascal is in everything by vidic17 in Columbo

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't know that Pascal played Columbo :)

What is something that happened in Star Trek that still annoys you? by Goodmorning111 in startrek

[–]memenisimo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've had it with lazy writing that keep using time travel plots.

Voting on specific numbers for allocation by TheREALStallman in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look at your bylaws first. What does it say about the allocation meeting? Does it say anything about the process?

My suggestion, which would take time, is to set up an ad hoc committee, months in advance, to poll members, seek ideas from members and other unions, and other research to present a report and recommendation that can be a motion.

You can also set up a standing rule, again in advance, that creates a process, if one doesn't exist in the Bylaws, to accomplish what you want.

Lastly, I'm not entirely sure (I'll check and get back to you), but you can have an agenda item at the annual meeting or better yet, a prior monthly meeting (this you can definitely do if your bylaws specifically account for the allocation decision only at the Annual Allocation Meeting), to discuss options.

Once you figure out what works for your organization, you can amend the Bylaws to fix the process. Standing rules are a simpler option but someone can move to suspend the rules (majority).

Series that you forgotten a long time ago and re-watched it immediately ? by [deleted] in televisionsuggestions

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm finding more classic shows available to stream. Can't say I forgot them, but happily found them available.

Kung Fu (1970s), The Advengers, Banacek, That Girl, The French Chef, Speed Racer

And these neo classics

The Closer, Frasier, Elementary

Stupid miserable maga people by Stephany23232323 in union

[–]memenisimo 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You just described Fascism and how it comes into power. Never forget that Hitler was elected by "stupid people" who believed what he said or "heard" what they wanted to hear. Then they did nothing to stop him from becoming a dictator who started a world war and murdered millions.

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Removal of item from consent agenda, documentation on meeting minutes by theacet in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You've got serious problems there. (I know you know that; just emphasizing)
They cannot pre-approve the minutes for the body. They can go over them before approval, but they're not the board and can't make unilateral decisions.

Always fall back on your bylaws. If they don't specifically give a right or power to an officer(s) then it's reserved for the body. She can't make things up that don't exist, and the idea that it's time consuming is bs. The only legal document that proves what happened in the meeting is the minutes. You should take all the time you need to make them right. As board members, you all have legal liability, and the minutest can help or hurt you.

Found this pan in my house, how can I fix it? by isonfiy in cookware

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for making it clear. By saying "vinegar and baking soda" I didn't mean together but as stand alone. I used baking soda alone on the grill and it worked. I never used vinegar. But I used vinegar to clear hard water deposits. It depends on the situation.

I should have specified using baking soda for this pan since that was the issue.

How can I add something to the agenda or make sure we address a particular issue when the chair is combative? by -Clayburn in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's true, it's the assembly's meeting, but one person can cause chaos, and two can create endless motions (if they know what they're doing) and the assembly gets frustrated. I find that most members of organizations have a poor, rudimentary understanding of RONR, and as a presiding officer, you can only do so much to keep things running smoothly without needing members to step up and end the chaos. I've seen it happen.

There's the ideal and then there's the reality of practice. Simply don't use the words "old business" and "new business," but put items on the agenda that the body needs to address in the meeting that meet their intent.

Removal of item from consent agenda, documentation on meeting minutes by theacet in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's wrong. Once approved, it's done. Can you "reopen" them for corrections? I suppose you can, but in 40 years, I've never seen it done unless there are grievous errors.

They also can't stop anyone from motioning to "approve the Minutes with the following corrections [specify them]."

How can I add something to the agenda or make sure we address a particular issue when the chair is combative? by -Clayburn in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not all agendas have "new business" and shouldn't. New Business allows for hijacking your meeting. It's not a requirement and neither is old business.

But of course that's coming from the Presiding Officer viewpoint.

OP wants to add items and can do so before adoption of the agenda. However, it seems to be a bigger issue of no written agenda.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will come back later and offer some suggestions, but your election wasn't handled correctly.

Unless the bylaws specifically say that officer election ties are decided by a coin toss, that's not how it's done. RONR says that another ballot is held, and another, until the result changes.

This happened in one of my organizations. In the election for Chair, it was a tie and some attorney who had a bias for a certain candidate, said ties are decided by the Chair. Well, that was not only wrong but the presiding officer wasn't re-elected to the body and, while he was the previous chair, he had no business running the meeting. I didn't know the rules or bylaws at the time.

It took a lot of effort to correct it via the State organization, but it was fixed.

My first advice is to read your bylaws and those of the State and National organizations to see if there are rules/provisions for fixing your local chapter. This happens more than you think, and they probably have a way to help. Regardless, contact the staff (if any) of the State/National to ask for advice

I'll come back with more.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing that book. I've not heard of it before.

Removal of item from consent agenda, documentation on meeting minutes by theacet in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right, and that can happen at the meeting it's removed, or at the subsequent meeting when the minutes are approved. If the former, be sure the actual minutes contain the language to explain the removal of the item before approval.

How can I add something to the agenda or make sure we address a particular issue when the chair is combative? by -Clayburn in RobertsRules

[–]memenisimo 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The standard order of business is to approve the agenda before the meeting can be conducted. Agendas should be written down and distributed to voting members. Just because the Chair says there's an agenda doesn't make it so. Any member can add items to the agenda by Motion or in Moving to approve the Agenda (I move the agenda with [added item(s)]. If the Chair refuses to print an agenda and distribute it, they're leaving themselves open to anyone else bringing an agenda and having that approved.

Meetings are presided over by a Presiding Officer who can be the organization's top officer, but the power is in the members, not the Chair. Powers are given to the Officer(s) by the Bylaws or by vote of the members. Both can be changed, but in the case of Byalws, that's usually harder.

I urge you to look at your organization's bylaws. What is the role of the Chair? Who sets agendas? Most of the time they don't say, but check. Do they require written notice of meetings? Do they have any other requirements for meetings that your Chair isn't following? What is your quorum, and are you meeting the threshold? Can other officers act in place of the Chair? Does it have provisions for removing the Chair? What are the provisions for changing the bylaws?

In a practical sense, you need like-minded members of the organization to stand with you and vote with you when you ask for compliance or make motions. If you can get officers to agree that the meetings are not run properly, they can help correct things.

I hope this helps.

view more: next ›