roberts-rules

# Robert's Rules > *"Structure forces genuine exploration of the decision space."* Parliamentary procedure prevents LLMs from short-circuiting to statistically-likely conclusions. ## The Stages ```yaml procedure: stages: 1_call_to_order: chair: "Announces meeting purpose" required: true 2_review_minutes: purpose: "What did we decide last time?" source: "Previous meeting minutes" action: "Amendments or approval" 3_new_business: purpose: "Topics requiring decision" format: "List of agenda items" 4_motion: who: "Any member" format: "I move that [specific action]" requirement: "Must be actionable" 5_second: who: "Different member" format: "I second the motion" meaning: "Worth discussing (not agreement)" if_no_second: "Motion dies" 6_debate: structure: "Pro, con, pro, con..." time_limits: "Optional per speaker" amendments: "Can be proposed during debate" 7_vote: methods: [voice, show_of_hands, roll_call] record: "All positions logged" threshold: "Simple majority unless specified" 8_adjourn: chair: "Meeting closed" next_meeting: "Scheduled if needed" ``` ## Implementation ```yaml # meeting/MEETING.yml meeting: id: strategy-review-2026-01-05 committee: strategy-board chair: joe # Continuity guardian runs the meeting minutes_from: strategy-review-2025-12-15.yml agenda: - "Client X engagement decision" - "Q1 pricing review" status: in_progress current_stage: debate ``` ## Motion Format ```yaml motion: id: motion-001 mover: frankie text: "I move that we accept Client X with explicit scope boundaries." second: by: tammy timestamp: "2026-01-05T14:23:00Z" status: under_debate ``` ## Debate Structure ```yaml debate: motion: motion-001 speakers: - speaker: frankie position: pro points: - "Budget aligned with our capacity" - "Exciting growth opportunity" - "Clear deliverables defined" - speaker: maya position: con points: - "Reputation for scope creep" - "Similar clients have burned us" - "Opportunity cost for other work" - speaker: vic position: pro_with_reservations points: - "Financials look solid" - "But we lack scope creep data" - "Suggest milestone-based contract" - speaker: joe position: defer points: - "2022 client was similar, went badly" - "But circumstances differ" - "Need more information" - speaker: tammy position: conditional_pro points: - "If we add explicit scope boundaries..." - "And milestone-based billing..." - "Risk becomes manageable" ``` ## Amendment Process ```yaml amendment: to: motion-001 mover: vic text: "Add: with milestone-based billing and quarterly scope review" second: by: tammy vote: for: [frankie, vic, tammy, joe] against: [maya] result: passes motion_now: "Accept Client X with explicit scope boundaries, milestone-based billing, and quarterly scope review" ``` ## Vote Recording ```yaml vote: motion: motion-001 (as amended) method: roll_call votes: frankie: aye maya: nay joe: aye vic: aye tammy: aye result: for: 4 against: 1 abstain: 0 outcome: PASSES minority_view: maya: "I remain concerned about scope creep risk. Recording my objection for the minutes." ``` ## Minutes Format ```yaml # meeting/minutes/strategy-review-2026-01-05.yml minutes: meeting_id: strategy-review-2026-01-05 date: "2026-01-05" attendees: [maya, frankie, joe, vic, tammy] chair: joe previous_minutes: approved_without_amendment motions: - id: motion-001 text: "Accept Client X with explicit scope boundaries, milestone-based billing, and quarterly scope review" outcome: PASSES (4-1) dissent: maya action_items: - assignee: vic task: "Draft milestone-based contract" due: "2026-01-12" - assignee: tammy task: "Design quarterly scope review process" due: "2026-01-10" next_meeting: "2026-01-12 to review contract" ``` ## Commands | Command | Action | |---------|--------| | `CALL TO ORDER` | Begin meeting | | `REVIEW MINUTES` | Read and approve previous | | `NEW BUSINESS [item]` | Add agenda item | | `MOVE [action]` | Propose motion | | `SECOND` | Support motion for debate | | `DEBATE` | Open structured discussion | | `AMEND [change]` | Propose motion modification | | `CALL THE QUESTION` | End debate, proceed to vote | | `VOTE` | Record positions | | `ADJOURN` | Close meeting | ## Why This Prevents Short-Circuiting | Without Structure | With Robert's Rules | |-------------------|---------------------| | LLM jumps to "likely" answer | Must build case through stages | | Hidden assumptions stay hidden | Debate surfaces them | | Minority views lost | Recorded in minutes | | No accountability | Votes create record | | "Everyone agrees" illusion | Actual disagreement visible |