Need to Learn Robert's Rules of Order

I regularly watch the televised proceedings of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate on C-Span1 and C-Span 2.  Sometimes, though, I get confused and lost as to what exactly they are talking about...tabling, reconsidering, quorum, objections...these and many other aspects of parliamentary-constructed meetings are obviously necessary, since they are used so much.  Yet I don't know all the ins-and-outs on when, how...and, most importantly...why they are used.  My own union local also uses the rules of order, and having started attending its bi-monthly meetings in September, I am similarly taken a little aback at how the proceedings flow there.  Supposedly, Robert's Rules of Order lay out everything one needs to know regarding how to conduct such meetings, and I feel it's about time I learned them.  Of course, sometimes in these assemblies the rules can get to be stretched or overlooked, and it's always good that the participants go into them with a spirit of comity, which is the attitude and expression of mutual courtesy and respect.  Sometimes this can be difficult with some folks by their nature, and also the degree of familiarity they might feel about those with whom they are attending.  I do know from watching the U.S. Senate for some sixteen years that it is possible to engage in some pretty passionate verbal combat on some issues while at the same time maintaining a sense of at least formally-expressed goodwill toward the opposing speaker, being deliberately generous with praise...and absolutely NO criticism or animosity on a personal level.  So order and civility go hand in hand in formal meetings, be they legislative, labor, or any other kind...it's probably a good idea to become well-trained in both...

The Overrated Small Group Circle

I'm not sure that this article is one based on principle as much as it is my feelings about a certain subject: how people are seated when in small groups.  I've noticed over the years in school, church, and the workplace that often the individual in charge of conducting the small group I am attending will insist on drawing up chairs in a circle, with everyone directly facing each other.  This is supposedly meant to engage everyone in the group...but I find it produces the opposite effect with me.  I find myself instinctively looking away from the others in the group while feeling defensive about them watching me...instead of focusing on whatever was the reason for the group in the first place.  If I happen to be a little out of sorts...be it sleepy, anxious, or displaying the numerous symptoms of my seasonal respiratory allergies...it all becomes readily apparent to all...call me self-conscious in that regard.  I also believe that many who insist on conducting small groups in circles do it precisely to make the participants uncomfortable...this enhances their power within the group to manipulate the others.  And also, the circle format creates the impression, accurate or not, that one's own opinions about a particular matter are subservient to those of the group...or should I say, those of the loudest and most dominant of the group...

I say all this because I recently heard someone ridicule the idea of people in a meeting sitting in rows and that they should instead be gathered in a circle.  I don't think folks need to follow either model...as long as we are within a reasonable proximity of each other, we should be able to sit facing whatever direction we want...as long as our backs aren't to everyone else...and in different places that make us feel the most comfortable.  But I'll repeat my earlier sentiment, and you cannot refute me because it is how I deeply feel: small groups in circles are worthless and counterproductive as far as what I get out of them, and they serve to worsen instead of strengthening my connection with the people involved...I consequently tend to avoid situations where they are mandated. There, I said it...