In yearly general meetings of the members of my housing organisation,
there are numerous aged members absent.
As a result, some prominent members carry many proxy votes on the
absentees' behalf.
In this situation, should these proxy votes be on a pre defined
subject with a decided yea or nay?
If not, the holder of these multiple "free" votes can overwhelm
individual single voters at the meetings, making for an unbalanced and >possibly unsatisfactory outcome for a large proportion of attendees.
Is this generally and traditionally considered to be acceptable
practice in these organisational situations?
In yearly general meetings of the members of my housing organisation,
there are numerous aged members absent.
As a result, some prominent members carry many proxy votes on the
absentees' behalf.
In this situation, should these proxy votes be on a pre defined
subject with a decided yea or nay?
If not, the holder of these multiple "free" votes can overwhelm
individual single voters at the meetings, making for an unbalanced and possibly unsatisfactory outcome for a large proportion of attendees.
Is this generally and traditionally considered to be acceptable
practice in these organisational situations?
Richard Treen <treenoakio@home.com> wrote:
In yearly general meetings of the members of my housing organisation,
there are numerous aged members absent.
As a result, some prominent members carry many proxy votes on the
absentees' behalf.
In this situation, should these proxy votes be on a pre defined
subject with a decided yea or nay?
If not, the holder of these multiple "free" votes can overwhelm
individual single voters at the meetings, making for an unbalanced and
possibly unsatisfactory outcome for a large proportion of attendees.
Is this generally and traditionally considered to be acceptable
practice in these organisational situations?
Such behaviour is, sadly, all too common in many situations. Many who run clubs/ associations / etc rely on the apathy of members / residents etc.
The only solution is to ‘play’ them at their own game by collecting the proxy votes for change or convince people to turn up.
It can be done, it just takes time / organisation.
In yearly general meetings of the members of my housing organisation,
there are numerous aged members absent.
As a result, some prominent members carry many proxy votes on the
absentees' behalf.
In this situation, should these proxy votes be on a pre defined
subject with a decided yea or nay?
If not, the holder of these multiple "free" votes can overwhelm
individual single voters at the meetings, making for an unbalanced and possibly unsatisfactory outcome for a large proportion of attendees.
Is this generally and traditionally considered to be acceptable
practice in these organisational situations?
On 29/02/2024 09:03 am, Richard Treen wrote:
In yearly general meetings of the members of my housing organisation,
there are numerous aged members absent.
As a result, some prominent members carry many proxy votes on the
absentees' behalf.
In this situation, should these proxy votes be on a pre defined
subject with a decided yea or nay?
If not, the holder of these multiple "free" votes can overwhelm
individual single voters at the meetings, making for an unbalanced and
possibly unsatisfactory outcome for a large proportion of attendees.
Is this generally and traditionally considered to be acceptable
practice in these organisational situations?
A proxy vote at a Parliamentary election is cast by the proxy according
to their own preferences. There is no way for the person giving their
vote to another (to use as a proxy) to mandate how it will be cast.
It is therefore advisable - if possible - to entrust one's vote to a
proxy whom one can trust to vote in the preferred way. The easiest way
to ensure that is to give the proxy to a member - and preferably an
officer - of the party one favours.
It seems likely to me that if that is the situation with Parliamentary elections (and it is), it is probably very similar with other, less
official, elections.
On 29 Feb 2024 at 15:28:08 GMT, "JNugent" <jnugent97@mail.com> wrote:
On 29/02/2024 09:03 am, Richard Treen wrote:
In yearly general meetings of the members of my housing organisation,
there are numerous aged members absent.
As a result, some prominent members carry many proxy votes on the
absentees' behalf.
In this situation, should these proxy votes be on a pre defined
subject with a decided yea or nay?
If not, the holder of these multiple "free" votes can overwhelm
individual single voters at the meetings, making for an unbalanced and
possibly unsatisfactory outcome for a large proportion of attendees.
Is this generally and traditionally considered to be acceptable
practice in these organisational situations?
A proxy vote at a Parliamentary election is cast by the proxy according
to their own preferences. There is no way for the person giving their
vote to another (to use as a proxy) to mandate how it will be cast.
It is therefore advisable - if possible - to entrust one's vote to a
proxy whom one can trust to vote in the preferred way. The easiest way
to ensure that is to give the proxy to a member - and preferably an
officer - of the party one favours.
It seems likely to me that if that is the situation with Parliamentary
elections (and it is), it is probably very similar with other, less
official, elections.
It is very common with companies and associations for the option to be presented in proxy forms *either* to mandate the vote for each motion (or candidate), *or* to leave it to the person holding the proxy. I don't know if there is any legal basis for this or whether it is just how the articles of association are written.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 300 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 34:13:58 |
| Calls: | 6,707 |
| Files: | 12,239 |
| Messages: | 5,353,328 |