[EM] Comments re Robert's Rules of Order

[RLSuter at aol.com]

In a message dated 8/4/05 5:23:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
davek at clarityconnect.com writes:

<< Lomax demonstrates familiarity with Robert's Rules (RONR).
 
 Suter writes a LOTTA words, for which I have general thoughts: >>

Some questions you need to answer. (1) assuming that Lomax is
more familiar with RONR than Suter, does that disqualify Suter
from commenting on RONR? That's what you seem to imply.
(2) Lomax writes a lot more words than Suter. Are you saying
that all of Lomax's words make sense and none of Suter's do?
(3) Is it possible that you haven't read Suter's words very carefully?
(4) Is it possible that your biases in favor of RONR are preventing
you from carefully considering Suter's words? (5) Is there any
chance in hell that Suter may be at least partly rignt and you
and/or Lomax may be at least partly wrong, or are you so
absolutely certain about the near infallibility of RONR that you
refuse to consider that any but very minor occasional revisions
of RONR will ever ever be needed, no matter what voting method
researchers and meeting process researchers and creative
meeting organizers may ever discover?

-Ralph