I apologize for not being present, but what is the origin of these new rules? I'm frankly surprised -- no, actually 'stunned' is a better word -- to see something so fully formed pop up as a complete document never before circulated on the list. I also note that some provisions of these "ordinary rules" are at odds with the previous rules of procedure that we adopted just last month. For example, the OP require us to work by consensus processes and these new rules ask us to work by motions and voting and implement a level of complexity that we had previously shunned. Finally, we can certainly amend the previous rules, but amendments to them need to be made by 70% of the accredited ALSs (see Para. 15). I don't believe you have 70% in the room in San Juan. As someone not in the room in San Juan, I'd really like to hear how we arrived at these new procedures and how the person(s) who presented them believe they relate to the already adopted OP. Many thanks. It sounds like great progress is being made on other fronts. Bret