A question that occurred to me — after watching the meeting videos, it seems like effectively, a lesser change is anything a majority of the business meeting declares is a lesser change (after an appeal of the decision of the chair).
Thus, if there's anything at all pending ratification, it seems like a sufficiently determined business meeting could get a constitutional amendment through in one year, by making an amendment by substitution and then ruling it a lesser change.
Is there any parliamentary procedure to stop a business meeting going completely off the rails in that way?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2016-09-11 11:19 pm (UTC)Thus, if there's anything at all pending ratification, it seems like a sufficiently determined business meeting could get a constitutional amendment through in one year, by making an amendment by substitution and then ruling it a lesser change.
Is there any parliamentary procedure to stop a business meeting going completely off the rails in that way?