DDC Committee: Proposed Procedures: GS1.3

GS1.0 | GS1.1 | GS1.2

DDC Committee: Proposed Procedures: GS1.3

This is an incomplete rough draft version and subject to committee critique and updates to incorporate committee input and aspects of GS2. The following procedures were developed over a 20 year period with primary input from previous DDC Committee members Dan Roddick, Jon Freedman, Scott Zimmerman, Alan Bonopane, Tim Selinski, Danny McInnis, Snapper Pierson, Thomas Lindell, Robbie Robison, Nick Hart, Harvey Brandt, and recent input from the current committee. These procedures were designed for a 5 member committee so we may want to bump up the numbers in 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 by one to accomodate our extra member. Note: The references (1) through (6) are NOT part of the proposed procedures but may or may not be folded into the procedures in the future pending discussion.


GS1.3

1. We work in one year sessions according to a schedule that meets WFDF requirements for rule construction.

2. Rule Construction entails three primary discussion phases: W- Working Issue, P- Proposal, R- Recommended Change and works like this:

2.1- An idea comes to mind by a member and communicated to the committee. If one other member feels the idea has merit, it becomes a "Working Issue". Discussion follows.

2.2- The working issue should be drafted into rough rule book format. A working issue receives extensive discussion and when it appears to have support by more than two members, and is considered a viable possible choice to become a rule, it advances to "Proposal" status. Discussion continues. An issue reaching "proposal" status may qualify for committee approved field testing.

2.3- Once the idea reaches "Proposal" status, it receives extensive discussion and modification as necessary to reach "rule book format". If the proposal shows simple majority support it advances to "Recommended Change status and receives final discussion and fine tuning. (1)

2.4 By July 15, a final version is submitted to the chair in rule book format to be balloted. The chair then snail mails the ballots to all committee members for final review and signed and dated approval. By mid August the ballots shall be returned to the Chair who will notify the members of the results. Recommended Changes require a simple majority vote plus one vote in order to "pass" and be sent to the WFDF Rules Committee for ratification. All members must vote. We now take a much needed vacation while the Rules Committee ratifies. Our recommended changes may come back to us with recommendations for our consideration.

2.5 At the completion of 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4, the subcommittees are to be notified of the issues progress. This notification shall be drafted by at least one member of the majority and the minority and be approved by a simple majority of the committee. (2)

3. The committee shall be comprised of at least five members. Preferred order of priority to be 5, 7, and 6. Should the committee choose to have a chair, he/she is an equal member and does not have any different power than the rest of the committee members. It is the chairs responsibility to initiate and guide procedure and interface with the WFDF Board. Member resignations shall be in writing to the committee with 30 days notice if possible.

4. We use Robert's Rules of Order as our guide (3). We will abide by WFDF Article I, (in particular Sections 102 and 103). We will strive to act in accordance with WDC-stRef1 (4). We will use WDC-REDS for our primary means of debate (5).

5 All members must actively participate in discussions and vote when required. Failure to do so may be cause for dismissal by The Board. Proxy votes are discouraged.

6. Promoting the sport should be a major committee goal.

7. Subcommittees shall be formed under each Committee member consisting of roughly 3 to 5 players in each region. The purpose of the subcommittee's is to share opinion between the committee and the players. Subcommittees may have chairs should they choose to do so.

8. The DDC committee has a standing request of the Board to consult the committee prior to altering our membership or taking any other actions that many be inconsistent with our existing procedures. (6)

Note: Be it known that I tend to construct rules that REDUCE ARGUMENTS on the playing field and lean toward promoting escapes while staying within number 4.


(1) Actually in 2.3 we tear it apart and play devils advocate with it carefully considering all minority opinion if one exists. We are usually sitting at least unanimous minus one or better in opinion at this time and a "recommended change" is considered to probably become a rule pending the final vote. Section 2 by virtue of advancement protocol, allows an unpopular issue to be killed if the majority feels it should be. The discussion phases are basically minority rules, and the final vote is majority rules with the Board's requirement of a "high level of consensus".

(2) This process in 2.5 insures DDC world knows what the committee is working on and gives them the opportunity to discuss the issues as players and give us their feedback including wording for rule book format recommended changes. The document approval is necessary because we have had serious problems in the past due to misrepresentation of opinions. An internet group has also been established where anyone can sign up to receive periodic updates of committee work.

(3) Robert's Rules of Order is an extensive and complex set of procedures designed for deliberation and debate. Our committee shall use them as our guide and will primarily incorporate aspects from the following summary version: Roberts Rules of Order provides common rules and procedures for deliberation and debate in order to place the whole membership on the same footing and speaking the same language. The conduct of ALL business is controlled by the general will of the WHOLE MEMBERSHIP - the right of the deliberate majority to decide. Complementary is the right of at least a strong minority to require the majority to be deliberate - to act according to its considered judgment AFTER a FULL and FAIR "working through" of the issues involved. Robert's Rules provides for constructive and democratic meetings, to help, not hinder, the business of the assembly. Under no circumstances should "undue strictness" be allowed to intimidate members or limit full participation. Our committee should draft a set of our own guidelines to designate how we will use RRO as our guide through the process of DISCUSSION, MOTION, VOTE. The fundamental right of deliberative assemblies require all questions to be THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED before taking action!

(4) WDC-stRef1 is a reference document relating to the six core ethical values - Trustworthiness, Respect, Responsibility, Fairness, Caring and Citizenship.

(5) WDC-REDS (aka Robbie's Email Deliberation System). This system will be a topic covered in my upcoming class offered to this committee. This system will reduce the size of our inboxes from a few hundred messages to just a few. It will considerably reduce or eliminate wasting of valuable time, quoting, mis-quoting, misleading statements, misrepresentation, hostile statements, and hearsay. The system is a highly efficient productive harmonious method for email deliberation.

(6) This request will give the committee an opportunity to modify it's procedures to be consistent with the Boards intentions prior to their actions solving potentially serious problems before they occur.