12-13-2014, 03:22 PM
"The other side of this is that there are honest intelligent people who perceive our bylaws differently and are adamant that they are correct."
The matter of interpretation raises new questions:
First, an "honest, intelligent" person would never insist that s/he is unalterably correct.
A discussion among reasonable interlocutors should be able to reach consensus on what a disputed Bylaw is stating. If any participant is "adamant" on having the only correct interpretation in opposition to the rest of the deliberating body, that person could vote his/her opinion but would be in the minority.. Majority rules.
Second, who would "educate" Board members (or the general membership) on the Bylaws? Would not that person (those people) just be conveying his/her (their) interpretation?
"It'd be a good idea to tweak some of our bylaws to clarify those particular areas that seem to be problematic."
Who would do the "tweaking"? Is that not just putting a particular interpretation on them?
It will be impossible to write Bylaws that will not be subject to differing interpretations. Some of them might be "tweaked" to make them appear to be more clear than they are now, but, again, that is the interpretation of the tweaker(s).
The matter of interpretation raises new questions:
First, an "honest, intelligent" person would never insist that s/he is unalterably correct.
A discussion among reasonable interlocutors should be able to reach consensus on what a disputed Bylaw is stating. If any participant is "adamant" on having the only correct interpretation in opposition to the rest of the deliberating body, that person could vote his/her opinion but would be in the minority.. Majority rules.
Second, who would "educate" Board members (or the general membership) on the Bylaws? Would not that person (those people) just be conveying his/her (their) interpretation?
"It'd be a good idea to tweak some of our bylaws to clarify those particular areas that seem to be problematic."
Who would do the "tweaking"? Is that not just putting a particular interpretation on them?
It will be impossible to write Bylaws that will not be subject to differing interpretations. Some of them might be "tweaked" to make them appear to be more clear than they are now, but, again, that is the interpretation of the tweaker(s).