2008's 310.15(B)(6) "100% Rule" Eliminated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Smart
After I posted and reread my post, I saw in it what you posted. My choice of wording did not get across what my intention was.


What I meant was...lets see how this portion/stage of the process pans out during the next two stages.
Accept in principle is usually not a written in stone acceptance of proposals.
 
I haven't really concentrated on what's been said here enough to be of much help, but...

Pierre C Belarge said:
I would wait until at least the ROC before I put too much interest into the changes.
Click to expand...
At this stage, we can offer input to hopefully change the end result to make it clearer - this is the most important stage, IMO. :)
 
George Stolz said:
I haven't really concentrated on what's been said here enough to be of much help, but...


At this stage, we can offer input to hopefully change the end result to make it clearer - this is the most important stage, IMO. :)
Click to expand...

I agree George, although I think the NITMAM idea of NFPA sort of throws a wrench in the cogs.
 
Pierre C Belarge said:
Smart
After I posted and reread my post, I saw in it what you posted. My choice of wording did not get across what my intention was.
Click to expand...
Actually, your intention came across just fine. ;)

Pierre C Belarge said:
What I meant was...lets see how this portion/stage of the process pans out during the next two stages.
Accept in principle is usually not a written in stone acceptance of proposals.
Click to expand...
Yes, but this is the comment stage, right?
 
ryan_618 said:
I agree George, although I think the NITMAM idea of NFPA sort of throws a wrench in the cogs.
Click to expand...
How so? As far as I know there have always been floor motions. The NITMAM just makes it more difficult to make a motion on the floor at the meeting where they adopt the code.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
How so? As far as I know there have always been floor motions. The NITMAM just makes it more difficult to make a motion on the floor at the meeting where they adopt the code.
Click to expand...

Lets say a proposal that is stupid gets rejected and rejected soundly. Because it was rejected so soundly, nobody makes a comment on it. Now suppose the CMP changes their mind on the issue and accepts it outright at the comment stage. In order to make a NITMAM, you must have had a public comment (similiar to speaking at a meeting on behalf of your own proposal/comment, but not anyone else's). Now you have a change that you can't make a floor motion on, because you didn't make a comment on it.
This is what happended to this very rule that we speak of. I saw how stupid it was at the proposal stage, and so did the panel. I didn't make a comment on it, and when it passed I couldn't do a NITMAM if I wanted to. I had to wait until this code cycle and make the proposal that is quoted above.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top