TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Robert's Rules of Order

49 点作者 larve超过 1 年前

12 条评论

NortySpock超过 1 年前
I recommend Rusty&#x27;s Rules of Order as a slimmed down, well-explained version.<p>The rules (both Rusty&#x27;s and Robert&#x27;s) are basically a state machine that helps people to run the kind of meetings that create top-down rules and directives for an organization with common ownership (so, a fraternity, sorority, union group, city council, or Parliament)<p>(Google brings up several PDFs if you search for Rusty&#x27;s Rules of Order)
评论 #37264287 未加载
mmastrac超过 1 年前
RRoO are useful for organizations that are well-functioning, but can be subject to denial-of-service from bad actors.
评论 #37269268 未加载
评论 #37264737 未加载
Digory超过 1 年前
A lot of “small town” America still runs on Roberts. It’s particularly good in low-trust and high-conflict meetings, where there still needs to be cohesion. School boards, religious groups, community groups, etc.<p>The largest parliamentary meeting in a given year is usually the Southern Baptist Convention, where up to 40,000 people use Roberts at a town hall meeting.<p>They’re a little heavy for a normal corporate team meeting, but those meetings usually can’t survive conflict.
评论 #37265456 未加载
kragen超过 1 年前
i see a lot of comments that don&#x27;t understand what this is for<p>basically robert&#x27;s rules of order exists to prevent different factions from leaving a meeting with conflicting interpretations of what was decided, or from preventing anything from being decided
lcall超过 1 年前
There is a freely older readable older version, and some helpful books on Robert&#x27;s Rules, at archive.org. Also there is a web site (findable with a search) that has an html version (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;robertsrules.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;robertsrules.com&#x2F;</a>).<p>ps: In reading some of the above I learned that there are informal ways to manage a meeting, so it doesn&#x27;t have to be stiff and formal all the time. But the formality can be used as soon as it is needed. (Haven&#x27;t yet had practice with it though, unlike some other commenters here.)
评论 #37284183 未加载
dragontamer超过 1 年前
I&#x27;ve been thinking about how modern social networks have turned us ignorant of working together in real life.<p>A lot of people in practice do not talk out decisions anymore. They instead go to the internet, look up other people&#x27;s arguments, and use that as the basis of their decision-making. In effect, the internet has replaced Robert&#x27;s Rules of Order as a form of cultural organization.<p>----------<p>* Instead of &quot;Everyone has 2 turns to talk per meeting&quot;, we have upvotes, like and subscribe for more visibility.<p>* Instead of deciding upon whether an issue is dead and moving on (60%+ vote to kill debate), we have trolls to shout down an argument and get people to leave.<p>* Instead of a chairman trying to balance everyone&#x27;s need for discussion, we have algorithms and influencers fighting to the top of attention hierarchies.<p>-----------<p>We don&#x27;t need Robert&#x27;s Rules because we can organize a perpetual online discussion on any subject we want. Alas, we&#x27;ve lost something... Parliamentary Theory taught that minorities deserve a discussion (even if they inevitably lose the vote). Forcing everyone to hear the minority&#x27;s discussion points before voting is fundamental to Robert&#x27;s Rules.<p>Now Roberts Rules are unwieldy, they&#x27;re slow. Forcing everyone to sit around and listen to everyone else talk one-at-a-time just doesn&#x27;t scale to Internet-sizes. But we also can&#x27;t leave our debates and discussions to online technologies.<p>Yes, &quot;some meetings should be emails&quot;. But meetings and conferences (as per Roberts Rules) existed for over a hundred years for a reason. Minority voices matter. The modern internet (Reddit, Youtube, TikTok, etc. etc.) doesn&#x27;t give a voice to the minority, so everyone constantly is feeling silenced.<p>--------------<p>Social Networks _have_ made things more convenient. And I think Hacker News proves the importance of moderators to lead discussion (Hacker News is very barebones in terms of social networking features, and instead relies upon the heroic efforts of moderators to keep us on subject).<p>Good discussions need leaders. Roberts Rules were mostly a set of rules for how leaders should lead discussions. A modern version of Roberts Rules would likely be more about how to be a moderator and how to ensure everyone gets a fair shot at the online discussion.<p>But I&#x27;m also not convinced that any social network has truly figured out the proper political theories with regards to how discussions to evolve in the online space. Roberts Rules had centuries of inspiration and political theory study, we&#x27;ve only had social media for a few short decades at best.
评论 #37265390 未加载
westurner超过 1 年前
From &quot;Free and Open Source Governance&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fossgovernance.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;fossgovernance.org&#x2F;</a> :<p>&gt; <i>An indexed collection of governance documents from Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) projects.</i><p>&gt; <i>FOSS Governance Zotero Collection:</i> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.zotero.org&#x2F;groups&#x2F;2310183&#x2F;foss_governance&#x2F;item-list" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.zotero.org&#x2F;groups&#x2F;2310183&#x2F;foss_governance&#x2F;item-l...</a><p>Open-source governance: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Open-source_governance" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Open-source_governance</a><p>Communication in distributed software development &gt; Forms of communication &gt; Synchronous, Asynchronous, Hybrid: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Communication_in_distributed_software_development#Forms_of_communication" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Communication_in_distributed_s...</a>
UtopiaPunk超过 1 年前
Robert&#x27;s Rules of Order is great for making decisions collectively when there&#x27;s more than a small handful of people involved. Rusty&#x27;s Rules of Order (thanks IWW!). I also have experience with another system called Sociocracy, which is both a structure for holding meetings as well as a neat structure for organizing decision making authority in a decentralized way among people: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Sociocracy" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Sociocracy</a><p>I&#x27;ve used these methods in non-profits, political party meetings, churches, and political activitist groups. However, I&#x27;ve never actually used these in the workplace! The key difference, I imagine, is in in my workplaces, there has always been a single individual or a couple individuals who clearly have the decision-making authority. They make ask for input from a wider group of people, but at the end of the day, they don&#x27;t care if everyone&#x27;s voice is heard, they just to make some kind of choice. Outside of the work I do for money, the other projects I&#x27;m drawn to are democratic.
TradingPlaces超过 1 年前
Obligatory link to The Wire, Season 3 <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=xO1zxPRRf4g">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=xO1zxPRRf4g</a>
ZYXER超过 1 年前
...WANTED TO POST THAT; BUT THOUGHT IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED <i>&quot;REDUNDANT&quot;</i>!
esafak超过 1 年前
Does anybody use these at work?
评论 #37263982 未加载
评论 #37264272 未加载
评论 #37264174 未加载
评论 #37264217 未加载
评论 #37268513 未加载
评论 #37263937 未加载
martinky24超过 1 年前
These days this exists just for frat boys. They love it.
评论 #37264376 未加载
评论 #37264448 未加载
评论 #37266075 未加载
评论 #37265498 未加载