Talk:Robert's Rules of Order/Archives/2013

Claims

Is anyone aware of any documentation that supports the following claims?

• "[RONR] is the most commonly adopted parliamentary authority among societies in the United States."
• "Being widely accepted, and being based for the most part on long-standing traditions of parliamentary procedure, however, the current edition of the book is a reliable reference."
• "RONR, is the most widely used parliamentary authority in the United States, according to the National Association of Parliamentarians"

Upon what is the National Association of Parliamentarians claim based? How do we know that RONR is really the most widely used parliamentary authority in the United States? Has an independent study been done? How do we know that the current edition of the book is really a "reliable reference?" What test was used in order to determine if the book is "reliable?" It seems to me that these claims are often made; however, I have never seen evidence that prooves that they are actually true. Squideshi 15:20, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe these statements are based on surveys the NAP has run. I'll see what I can do for supporting documentation. I don't know that anyone else has run surveys (except possibly the AIP); the subject is not one that gets a lot of interest.

As for being a reliable reference, about all I can say is that, for societies that have adopted Robert's Rules of Order as their parliamentary authority, it is, by definition, the most reliable reference. I am not aware of any substantial claims otherwise. I can say, as a Professional Registered Parliamentarian, that RONR is the only standard accepted by the NAP. Jay Maynard 17:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I am going to clean up the first sentence a bit. Although I believe that RONR is (by far) the most used authority, I also cannot find any good reference to a real study. The article makes this claim again in a later paragraph with a reference to a jim slaughter article, i will keep that, maybe someone can re-locate the link (which is currently broken) Rjljr2 (talk) 15:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC)