Points are how a delegate raises something outside the normal flow of debate: a procedural mistake, a personal need, a question. Unlike motions, they aren’t voted on; the chair just rules on them directly.
Of the four described below, only point of order exists in the real UN General Assembly. The other three are Model UN additions, layered on to give delegates more structured ways to participate and to keep the chair accountable.
Point of order
Raised when a delegate believes the chair has made a procedural mistake, like skipping roll call or misapplying a rule. Directed at the chair. Sources genuinely disagree on whether it can interrupt a speaker mid-speech: some conferences allow it “within reason” for serious errors, others reserve interrupting power for personal privilege only. Don’t assume either way going in.
Point of personal privilege
For a delegate’s own ability to participate: can’t hear, the room’s too cold, a broken placard, audio problems. This is the point most consistently described as allowed to interrupt a speaker, and even then, typically only when the issue genuinely can’t wait (inaudibility being the classic example).
Point of parliamentary inquiry
A question to the chair about procedure itself, like “what happens if this motion fails” or “how much time is left in this caucus.” It’s about the rules, not about debate content, and it cannot interrupt a speaker.
Point of information
A question directed at a delegate, not the chair, about a speech they just gave, used during GSL speeches when the speaker has yielded to questions. The distinction from parliamentary inquiry is both who it’s directed at (a delegate, not the chair) and what it’s about (the content of a speech, not a procedural rule).
Some conferences merge parliamentary inquiry and point of information under a single label, or use “point of information to the chair” for what others call parliamentary inquiry. If a term feels like it’s being used slightly differently than described here, that’s likely why.
Next: Motion list