On Thu, 20 Apr 2017, Publius Scribonius Scholasticus wrote:
> My Copy of RONR11 would also suggest that it is a point of order,
given that it is a custom
> of the Assembly.
>
> ----Publius Scribonius Scholasticus
>
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Aris Merchant
<thoughtsoflifeandligh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
We >>>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Benjamin Schultz
<ben.dov.schu...@gmail.com> wrote:
need >>>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Kerim Aydin
<ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
more >>>>
sides >>>>
in >>>> Minor point of order for new folks:
this >>>>
thread >>>> We've historically promoted bottom-posting for replies (with
editing of past
so >>>> thread pieces allowed). Unfortunately not well-supported by
current email
let's >>>> clients. I mildly prefer bottom-posting for things like
judicial threads with
think >>>> counter arguments. Ultimately, I don't mind either way, but
the combination of
out of >>>> different people using both bottom and top-posting makes
these longer threads a
the >>>> bit challenging to follow :)
box. >>>
>>>
-G. >>> Nitpicking point of procedure:
>>>
>>> You raised a point of personal privilege, having to do with ease of
or impediments to
>>> participation, instead of a point of order, a breach of procedure.
At least according
>>> to RONR10, and Agora by custom follows S&N.
>>
>> Given that it affects everyone, wouldn't it be a point of the
privileges of the assembly
>> (a point of privilege affecting the assembly, depending on where you
look)? That's what
>> my copy of RONR11 seems to suggest, although I may well be
misinterpreting it.
>>
>> -Aris
