The Chat Box: Boon or Boondoggle? This article considers whether the chat box is a boon or boondoggle in the conduct of business at formal meetings, and how it can be useful in formal and informal meetings. The recent shift to electronic meetings (e-meetings) was disruptive, but also created new opportunities. While some regard an e-meeting as a poor substitute for an in-person meeting, an e-meeting has its own advantages. Such meetings will be a permanent part of our future, and it is useful to understand how they can best serve the needs of organizations. Electronic meetings present some new features that do more than replicate in-person functionality. Such features may help or hinder the democratic process in deliberative assemblies. One such commonly available feature is the chat box. This is a field in which attendees can enter text. This function usually has several possible settings; attendees can chat publicly or privately with each other, only with the meeting host, or be disabled completely. The entered text can be saved. Is the chat box a help or a hindrance in the conduct of business at a deliberative assembly meeting? First, let’s determine if the use of the chat box meets the definition of a deliberative assembly. A deliberative assembly is a group of people meeting in a setting that allows simultaneous aural communication among all participants.1 The opportunity for all members to hear each other is fundamental to the deliberative process. A group using
••• By Carl Nohr, PRP
texting, emails, chat rooms, and faxes does not constitute a deliberative assembly. Next, by reviewing relevant parliamentary principles, let’s examine why the use of such texting functions does not meet the definition of a deliberative assembly.2 One person has the floor at a time.3 Before a member can speak in a meeting, they must obtain the floor. This is done through recognition by the chair that the member has the exclusive right to be heard at that time. In a chat box, multiple members may enter text without recognition. Only one question can be considered at a time.4 This long-standing parliamentary principle is essential to allow members to know exactly what is being discussed and decided at any given time. The presiding officer has the responsibility to control the meeting in such a way that this principle is respected. Such control over what members may enter in the chat box is not practical. All remarks must be germane to the single question under consideration.5 This is an essential principle to allow fair and efficient conduct of business. Even an excellent presiding officer, with support, would be challenged to monitor the chat box and rule entries out of order if they were not germane. 1 2 3 4 5
RONR (12th ed.) 1:1 RONR (12th ed.) 9:34 RONR (12th ed.) 3:30 RONR (12th ed.) 5:4 RONR (12th ed.) 43:20 www.parliamentarians.org
13
